The Trouble With Scribbles
- Thread starter Buy1Sell2
- Start date
Arch Crawford astrologer-- among the most accurate market newsletter of all time--
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/arch-crawford/27/bb8/999
Does this mean we should be studying astrology ? And who checked Wyckoff's record??
surf
Last edited:
It's value will vary greatly among those who attempt to learn it and trade with it. It will have no value to every single person who doesn't commit to learning the material and testing it against real-time market conditions.
It is not a system. If you are looking for a system, then no need to waste your time with this method, which is a method by which one may organize his or her view of market behavior.
It emphasizes getting into the market when the price risk that must be assumed is at its lowest extent possible and getting out as soon as that level is breached. It emphasizes staying in the trade until such time as the market indicates the risks of staying in are now greater than the potential reward for staying in.
Anyone who has studied this approach knows exactly what all those charts DbPhoenix posts ahead of time imply as to the potential for trades to be taken. Everyone who has made the assumption that they understand this approach well enough to judge show their ignorance by calling for real time calls. They would understand where trades will be taken based on the charts posted, and they will understand that the trade direction and timing cannot be determined until the opportunity is upon you - and at that point the concern should be getting the trade on, not pumping one's ego or salving another's lust by posting calls to an internet message board.
It is not a system. If it were I would automate it and be able to take advantage of earlier tee times. It is a method or approach or framework by which one can learn to organize current market behavior for the purpose of identifying trades with a higer probability for profit than loss over the long run.
You have confused the process by which one learns to discern whether the opportunity at hand is to long or to short with the rather simple process of finding the current range. My prep works takes about 30 seconds after the close, and about that long prior to the open. The process of learning to read behavior at those levels takes far longer to master. But once you do, it is a skill that most don't have, most won't make the effort to learn, and some, such as you and marketsurfer, won't even believe can exist in a human being. That gives those who have developed the skill a tremendous edge over those who don't, won't, or can't.
Then your thread should have focused on showing the efficacy of your method rather than trying to "prove the negative" with respect to price action trading. You sound like a fool with your constant denials of the phenomena of support, resistance, trend channels, trends/ranges/breakouts/retracements. If you have a method to share, then share it. But that is not what your goal is, is it?
I repeat: If you were happy and successful with your trading you would either be shareing your method with others, or you would be afraid of "giving away your edge" and you would not be anywhere near a message board. My sincere belief is the majority of those with whom I am engaging over these stupid arguments against price action trading are failures and fools. Successful people do not need to build themselves up by tearing others down. Successful people do not pound the internet table saying "I've been around the block." Successful people just keep doing whatever it is that has made them successful. And many will pay it forward through charitable donations or by helping others achieve success as well.
Only failures become trolls. Only failures want to see "evidence" of other's success. Successful people believe in success. They are living it. Successful people think "I am successful - I have no reason to think I have a monopoly on success - why in heaven's name would I doubt someone else is also successful?"
Think about it, people. If you were living your dream, how much of your time are you going to spend trying to prove someone else isn't?
Last edited:
I think about this when reading posts from those who want to know EXACTLY where to enter. Where one enters is largely irrelevant. What matters more is whether or not one wants to be in the trade at all. And determining whether or not one wants to be in the trade entails a bit more thought and effort than jumping on some tick or other. This obsession with exactitude is an expression of fear, nothing less.
Exactly. As I have said many times, most of my entries are market orders. If it is a good trade at 90, then it should still be a good trade at 90.25 or 91 for that matter.
Last night someone asked me in a private thread how my buddy was doing with his trading. He is doing very well. I attribute this largely to these two factors: First, like me, he was directed to price action trading from the very start. To tell you the truth, I'm not sure he's even aware of all the available "studies" in his trading platform. Second, and just as important if not more so, he is an accomplished poker player. He is not a pro, but his income from playing poker was substantial (he lives near AC and used to play poker regularly). So he was very comfortable with the notion of losing his ante when losing a trade and not winning the pot every hand. He essentially has no fear of loss.
It doesn't mean anything. If someone, on that basis, wanted to test astrology against real-time market conditions, what business would it be of yours or mine? And if they did just that and claimed it to work, on what basis would you or I, not having done the testing, be able to call his claims into question? IMO, we'd have no basis whatsoever, other than pure, unreflective, emotionally reactive prejudice, if that happened to be our thing. I eschew prejudice myself. I would assume you would as well.
I suspect, marketsurfer, that the hedge funds using Wyckoffian (Wyckovian?) concepts to organize some or all of their contextual analysis did not even think to check to see if they could "fact check" Wyckoff's personal trading results. I do think they would have been more concerned with understanding those concepts, back testing those concepts, and then testing them against real-time market conditions. As you yourself have found, even though these concepts offer no predictive value to you, they do, at the very least, have descriptive value. And in this game, even being able to describe price as being higher today than it was 28 days ago can have some informational value to a trader.
Last edited:
Name the hedge funds. I bet they underperform or have folded.
Otherwise , your points are good. I dont disagree.
Niederhoffer blew up twice. What does that prove?