The authors of "The Bible of Technical Analysis" and review of the "Bible".

marketsurfer said:
I agree that money management is the real key absent a true edge.

With that said, i hav nothing against subjective TA -- it's objective mechanical TA that doesn't work. If you can intuitively profit from TA, i cant argue with that

However, you can't show me an objective TA system based on fixed rules that works any better than random.

surf
More...

Good to see agreement on key factor!

Here is the current performance of my high risk trading portfolio.

chart.png
 
marketsurfer said:
I gotta meet you one of these days Prado---.

You are hell bent on discrediting me, seriously gonzo hate vibing-- i don't get it.

All you have are a typo, aliases from years ago when i tried to launch a competing site, and rumors about some lawsuit after 13 years and 1000's of posts.

You really don't know any of the facts--

You must be an angry investor who we lost money for or an agent of my ex--- Nothing else makes sense.
More...


No Surf. I call them like I see them. Every time I criticize you it is based on FACTS. You do nothing but basically pollute this place and even admit you are here to stir things up. You always like to point out page views. You are here to stir shit up, nothing more. I try to overlook things with you but you are such a douchebag at times it's impossible. You miraculously end up in the same kind of threads all the time spewing your bs. In this case another longtime member had already called you out for what you are.

As far as what you said? It happened more than once with your "futures" trade. Was a typo? A typo means you then really didn't do the trade and it was a paper trade/sim trade. Unfortunately those hold no weight. I figured a "hedge fund expert" like you would be trading real money. Funny how you rip on the small new traders here who at least have the stones to put on real trades while you sit back as a simulator cowboy.

I was not talking about a competing site. I was talking about your recent site astockcollapse.com or whatever it was called. You do remember that right? You were charging like 295 bucks a month for your knowledge of trading and signals. You have since removed it, but many on here saw it. It was talked about on other threads.

As far as aliases ? Who gives a crap why you did it. It is a weak move.

An investor of yours???? LOL. That is some serious funny shit. Surf. I had been in the trading biz well before the dotcom bust when you blew out all of your money and friends money. If I had even seen any kind of prospectus of yours I am sure I would have seen right through it. I am sure you had no track record, so anyone who lost everything with you really had no reason to complain. They kind of had it coming without doing any due diligence.

If the MS on here is anything like you are in real person then it's probably best for you to not meet me in person. I am a very down to earth person and easy going, but have no problem calling out bullshittters/douchebags to their face.
 
Last edited:
GloriaBrown said:
Why it doesnt work for two who wrote the book? One of them just beame high school teacher right after the book was done, never really traded at all. Another one made living by writing TA after 20 years of sales job, never really made any fortune from TA, not even applied his TA
More...

You're really grabbing for straws to discredit a book that you've never read. and its authors as well. And come to think of it, why am I playing the defense attorney here? Guess I'm just hoping that others out there aren't swayed away from reading it by your bias that is based on God knows what.

The attached is from the book itself, which I imagine you'll call a lie, having been written just to sell books.
 

Attachments

  • JM.JPG
    JM.JPG
    38 KB · Views: 66
learner2007 said:
The editions previous to the 7th would be the best to read, IMO. As the character who got the rights to the book after the authors died revised it, and truly ruined a great book. In addition to the 50 or so books I have, I guess I've skimmed through 1000 TA/trading books in bookstores. A good point or two can be found in many books. But as the source for learning basic TA, there is no better book, IMO. And then you'll have what's needed to do your own study and research in this area should you desire to do so
More...

Learner - There is another book called 'Technical Analysis and Stock Market Profits' by Schabacker and Mack. I have not read anything by Schabacker. So before getting into reading his work, just wanted to ask what your thoughts are on the above as compared to Technical Analysis of Stock Trends.
 
One of the worst advices I hailed when starting to trade is buying this book and trying to read it.
Way too long and boring, gave it a few tries over a 1 year period, and each try was a waste of my limited reading energy.
Also quite useless, one is much better off imo to pick up another book on TA which gives a faster review about the basics, which are more than enough for the TA I use at least.
 
EPrado said:
No Surf. I call them like I see them. Every time I criticize you it is based on FACTS. You do nothing but basically pollute this place and even admit you are here to stir things up. You always like to point out page views. You are here to stir shit up, nothing more. I try to overlook things with you but you are such a douchebag at times it's impossible. You miraculously end up in the same kind of threads all the time spewing your bs. In this case another longtime member had already called you out for what you are.

As far as what you said? It happened more than once with your "futures" trade. Was a typo? A typo means you then really didn't do the trade and it was a paper trade/sim trade. Unfortunately those hold no weight. I figured a "hedge fund expert" like you would be trading real money. Funny how you rip on the small new traders here who at least have the stones to put on real trades while you sit back as a simulator cowboy.

I was not talking about a competing site. I was talking about your recent site astockcollapse.com or whatever it was called. You do remember that right? You were charging like 295 bucks a month for your knowledge of trading and signals. You have since removed it, but many on here saw it. It was talked about on other threads.

As far as aliases ? Who gives a crap why you did it. It is a weak move.

An investor of yours???? LOL. That is some serious funny shit. Surf. I had been in the trading biz well before the dotcom bust when you blew out all of your money and friends money. If I had even seen any kind of prospectus of yours I am sure I would have seen right through it. I am sure you had no track record, so anyone who lost everything with you really had no reason to complain. They kind of had it coming without doing any due diligence.

If the MS on here is anything like you are in real person then it's probably best for you to not meet me in person. I am a very down to earth person and easy going, but have no problem calling out bullshittters/douchebags to their face.
More...


Whatever Prado. Just to correct you, I never rip on new traders-- and very rarely if ever rip on anyone personally--unless completely provoked-- ( like the guy who emailed me proprietary information, then tried to sue for my "stealing" it) we shut him down immediately

- anyone trying to make it in the markets has my respect. I'll rip on their tactics and methods when I believe they are on the wrong road--- no one needs to listen to me-- I really don't care--- but at least I know I tried to guide them. Sorry that you don't get it.

My other stuff, its all in good fun-- entertainment when I am bored--- sorry that you don't get it--

But that's ok, why not just put surf on ignore?

peace,


surf

maybe stop by the Norton in WPB on 9.30--- should be a great event, have a Madison Ave PR firm helping with it- http://pbhfa.org/event/september-2015/ and this is your personal invite
 
Last edited:
GloriaBrown said:
The two authors of "Technical Analysis of Stock Trends" which many call it "The Bible of Technical Analysis" are:

Robert D. Edwards John
John Magee

You may expect these two guys earn a lot of money from market since they wrote the Bible of TA? Let's see their outcome:

http://knowledgebase.mta.org/?fusea...esourceID=13D415EC-EE10-3BCF-3447AE4BADFB8263

Robert D. Edwards John: "This partnership lasted less than a decade before Edwards left in 1951 to become a high school science teacher in South Carolina."

Very likely Robert found out that kept writing "bible" would not help him make more money than being a high school teacher so he left John Magee and of course his teacher career had nothing to do with trading. Robert knew being a high school teacher had much better chance to make a living than writing more bible or using his knowledge in this bible to win(not lose) any money in market, his bid should be correct!

How about John?

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/financial-theory/10/pioneers-technical-analysis.asp

"Unfortunately for Magee, early on he was better at looking after his clients than his own portfolio, often selling out in his own portfolio based on gut feelings despite strong hold signals from his charts."

So he could not believe what he wrote when he invested. Base on what I read from articles, John kept writing more stuff about TA. Very likely he made a living by writing "interesting" TA stuff but nothing really from investment (especially from TA).

"Magee graduated from MIT in 1923 and worked in a variety of sales and marketing jobs, including a position as a Fuller Brush salesman, until he met Robert D. Edwards in 1942."

MIT sounds cool right? But what did John really do before he started to write Bible with Robert and then kept writing about TA? John was a salesman but nothing else! John had been a salesman for around 20 year before having an idea to write TA stuff included bible with Robert. John came up with a perfect marketing solution to help him makes money after having 20 years of marking experience!

So I went through one of the original version of this "bible". It is very thick around 500 pages, most are wording, really a lot of wording and no scientific proof at all, just some random graphs showing "it works in this graph, then it should work anytime anywhere". Even in any graph that they tried to prove it works, there are so many ways to look at the same graph and write any kind of trendlines, curve line or whatever on there. No figure or data to prove any "idea" in the "bible" has any prediction power.

I really cannot just believe a "bible" by a high school teacher and a "financial entertainment writer" would help me anything related to trading especially no scientific proof in the bible at all but just crazy many wordings with few graphs.

Honestly it is much worse than watching CNBC. At least I can get some facts from CNBC news.

A lot or most of the TA are originally come from this "bible". Can we believe TA at all? Is TA more useful than purely guessing? Careers of these two authors tell you the answer!
More...

Great investigative reporting, Gloria Brown. Some folks will never be able to distinguish marketing from reality, for others its as clear as day.

All this stuff has a very real L.Ron Hubbard meets Dale Carnegie vibe to it---- it's like arguing with a scientologist who just left a tony robbins meeting ( I like robbins, just making a point) surf
 
learner2007 said:
I read the book in question 40 years ago along with the book by Schabacker on which it is based. I had skimmed through a few books previously, and am glad that this was the first book from which I seriously tried to learn TA. I recommended the book to a college student who worked at the Starbucks I go to every day b/c he was interested in trading. He really studied hard and I helped him get through the book based on my experience. I recommend that he start out paper trading, and if that went well, the could try trading stocks on the smallest possible scale. However as he had too little money to buy stocks, he jumped into index futures. I'll have you know that in his first year after studying TA he made a 700% profit day trading at night, between classes and his part time job. I did teach him a few things not found in the book. But I would say the 99% of his success was based just on the the knowledge found in that book, in addition to his diligent efforts.
However, I know a number of people who have read the book and stopped part way through. Admittedly the book/TA is not for everybody, just as some people find it difficult to learn foreign languages, or never become good at playing chess. Then there are many others who read it just once and then thinking 'OK, I got it', jump into the trading ring. It's just not that easy. Just as you have the majority who learn TA in 3 days and 2 nights from a comic book. and then say TA doesn't work. I would say that reading the book a number of times, and paper trading until you really get it should take most people at least 1 to 2 years. Of course, few are willing to make such an effort. A tourist can learn to speak a little from a Berlitz phrase book. But if you want to use the language in business, just as with TA, you need to take the full course.

The editions previous to the 7th would be the best to read, IMO. As the character who got the rights to the book after the authors died revised it, and truly ruined a great book. In addition to the 50 or so books I have, I guess I've skimmed through 1000 TA/trading books in bookstores. A good point or two can be found in many books. But as the source for learning basic TA, there is no better book, IMO. And then you'll have what's needed to do your own study and research in this area should you desire to do so
More...

the best TA book ever written is "evidence based technical analysis" by my friend David Aronson --here is his site http://www.evidencebasedta.com/

Another great book that helped define my own strategy is "trade like a hedge fund" by James Altucher.

Best wishes,

surf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top