The best traders in ET

[sheda]

Quote from marketsurfer:

No idea, I don't look at charts of the past for any decision making.

The answer then is no, you lack the ability to trade even with charts as current to the market as the 1 minute time frame. That fact sums up your credibility on the issue. You can Not trade.

It rained yesterday, are you admitting you didn't get wet? LOL! You peeps are weak.

Editing is the sign of a weak mind, relax, take a deep breath. think about what you would like to say in total before you commit to writing your post, and may I point out to you, the word umbrella.

 

[R. Raskolnikov]

So because I have been trading for a long time, consistently and in large part due to a TA based system, that automatically makes me arrogant because I've created a set of rules that works? I don't understand, isn't that the whole goal of trading...to make money?

Quote from marketsurfer:

In addition to this and your other comments, it should be understood that the TA true believers such as. etc MUST believe themselves to be smarter , superior to and more savvy than the 1000's of quants, academics and other professional traders who have reached the same conclusions that TA is bunk. What incredible arrogance.

 

[CalVolibrator]

;-) good luck to you sweet Gloria.

Quote from GloriaBrown:

All I said having link to prove their creditability, where is yours? Both of my PHD Carol and Jones cases are good examples with authority, I don't see your arguments even have an link or serious challenging point at all.

For PHD Carol head and shoulder paper, so you think she should backtest every single data in all history and make sure she has a way to perfectly predict the future? What she did in the paper has statistical significance and New York Reserve Bank approved that to let her release the paper.

For Jones case, no one in the world can understand what you are talking about. Prove what you said with link or whatever, don't just spam.

 

[CalVolibrator]

sure with the benefit of hindsight, you could, however, as well have lost a fortune if instead the stock had whipsawed throughout the day. Your fallacy is that you behave as if you know what is gonna happen.

Quote from sheda:

http://dc654.2shared.com/download/3WPo7db-/OVTI.JPG?tsid=20130817-103053-fbcb4b32


So you are admitting here that there was no way you could have made money, more money than you lost, with the above chart?

 

[CalVolibrator]

generally, I agree re academicians. That is precisely why I said that there is the occasional gem to be found. Maybe you want to check where most all derivatives pricing models originated before you write all academic research off. I had the pleasure to attend a course David Heath was holding in his last year of teaching.

a) perfectly well put, TA is a pure art for artists. I have never heard of an artist to pass on vast wealth before his passing away. Neither have I ever heard of a TA technician strike it rich, not one. Please be aware that most all depicted traders in J.Schwager's series analyzed price series, which cannot be equated to technical analysis. The few who admitted to having applied technical analysis have years later out of shame bought up thousands of video copies to get rid of the embarrassing evidence.

b) absolutely wrong, there is no single piece of art in pricing a derivative, nor is there in fusion, genetics, and many other aspects of the sciences.

Quote from rtr1129:
Academics. Those who can't. TA is a tool to be used in an art, by an artist. If you try to use a math formula to test a paint brush, it's easy to conclude that paint brushes don't work, despite overwhelming empirical evidence to the contrary. You seem to have already made up your mind though. It's ironic how everything in life, even concrete matters of scientific research, are ultimately based on one's faith.

 

[CalVolibrator]

Sure, then write a book AFTER you struck it rich, we are all excited to see the first piece of evidence worldwide, published by a chart technician to have derived an edge. And please do not forget to sign my copy. Unfortunately no prices for those who made money off the back of non-TA because there are just too many who live on acres of acres of in Greenwich, CT. But they would love to finally welcome a TA pal among their midst.

Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

So because I have been trading for a long time, consistently and in large part due to a TA based system, that automatically makes me arrogant because I've created a set of rules that works? I don't understand, isn't that the whole goal of trading...to make money?

 

[sheda]

Quote from CalVolibrator:

sure with the benefit of hindsight, you could

So after your decades of market experience you do not see a single thing on that chart that could have been acted upon as it was developing, understood.

however, as well have lost a fortune if instead the stock had whipsawed throughout the day.

So after your decades of market experience you do not have a single tool, method or perception to recognize tight ranging and whipsawing markets as they are present or developing, understood.

Your fallacy is that you behave as if you know what is gonna happen.

Clearly the words of a man who has never traded. Going long, going short, are both behaviors, which are based on thinking you know what is going to happen, along with having adequate measures in place to address risk and minimize loss. The anti ta brigades main issue is they are Scared of uncertainty and they are Scared to be wrong.

 

[R. Raskolnikov]

Your kind ALWAYS believes there is only ONE way to do things. No wonder you lack the creative thinking ability to forge out a winning system. Don't worry, you have plenty of company.

Quote from CalVolibrator:

Sure, then write a book AFTER you struck it rich, we are all excited to see the first piece of evidence worldwide, published by a chart technician to have derived an edge. And please do not forget to sign my copy. Unfortunately no prices for those who made money off the back of non-TA because there are just too many who live on acres of acres of in Greenwich, CT. But they would love to finally welcome a TA pal among their midst.

 

[nitro]

Here is my research:

Absolutely there are instruments to which TA can work and it is incredible how locked in a particular indicator can be to that instrument, even for weeks or months.

The problem is FINDING those instruments. The system is not the TA, it is the instrument itself.

When someone posted that chart that showed some sort of a MA that worked when I think OTVI broke down through it, I would not take that lightly. Bring that chart up in your own software, write a little program that tests for the last month say if taking breakdowns or breaouts would show a profit. If it does, TRADE IT and be ready to stop trading it if it fails. That in itself requires research. When does something stop working? It takes experience. Scientists use Bayesian Inference, but the disciplined human brain can intuit the same thing.

That is the secret of TA. It is the instrument, not so much the indicator, or perhaps the two together. It is perhaps where artistry and science border each other in trading.

 

[nitro]

Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

Who said ANYTHING about "indicators"? Do you really believe this is all that TA is about?

Well, I believe in indicators, as to me they are just signal processing tools applied to financial data. The "secret sauce" is not the indicator, it is the instrument to which it is applied. The whole thing of price action I believe can also work, but only for the most gifted of traders - the Picasso and Leonardo of trading. If you think you have that kind of talent, be my guest and trade using price action. Imo it cannot be modelled on a computer today, but I have been wrong before. Hidden Markov Models are probably as close as we are today to modelling this sort of trading, but imo it is very crude.