This Market Sucks!!!

....based on the technical nonsense talk here - HOW many of you 'analysts' went fully long based on your charting? following the breakdown at around 3.30 below the day's support and simulaneous pop back above the day's support, you should've all gone FULLY long and retired by now, no?

.....and how many of you rationalizing that it was basically a long market actually would've laid it on the line if there was NO gasparino news? or are you all trading for 5 ticks?

- bottom line is that without that news, there's no real rally at 3.30. you can all rationalize it as much as you want. and unless you did go long full boat before the news, then you are all just talkers. case closed...and seriously, i mean no offense to anyone...just quite ridiculous to base that monster rally on technicals on a relatively light and quiet friday.
 
Quote from JSSPMK:

Q: I wonder how the heck do these fundamentalists manage to time the market without referring to technicals?

A: They have 100 handle stops.
More...


technicals are great at times...but thinking that it was a technical rally is absurd. sometimes all technicals go down the tubes where there's important news disseminated. that's all. i guess you can't use technicals AND something else....it's either/or?
 
Quote from SlyFlo:

....based on the technical nonsense talk here - HOW many of you 'analysts' went fully long based on your charting? following the breakdown at around 3.30 below the day's support and simulaneous pop back above the day's support, you should've all gone FULLY long and retired by now, no?

.....and how many of you rationalizing that it was basically a long market actually would've laid it on the line if there was NO gasparino news? or are you all trading for 5 ticks?

- bottom line is that without that news, there's no real rally at 3.30. you can all rationalize it as much as you want. and unless you did go long full boat before the news, then you are all just talkers. case closed...and seriously, i mean no offense to anyone...just quite ridiculous to base that monster rally on technicals on a relatively light and quiet friday.
More...

To put it in layman's terms what you are saying is that you have no clue when it comes to TA, no offense.
 
this was a total "whip saw rally" that most missed out on. the break below support caused many to go short and the rally happened so fast that most covered at much higher prices. this was one of those unforeseen events that traders just cannot predict. some guys made money,don't get me wrong but even the most experienced and nimble were caught completely off guard. i was out of the market so i neither lost or gained.
 
Quote from SlyFlo:

technicals are great at times...but thinking that it was a technical rally is absurd. sometimes all technicals go down the tubes where there's important news disseminated. that's all. i guess you can't use technicals AND something else....it's either/or?
More...

Do you read with 1 eye shut? :confused:

I quite clearly said that a turn was seen via technicals, strength of turn came from combination of variables, yes news potentially helped quite a bit.

Next time there is key data release I can show you how to analyse p/a before news hits the wire using TA.
 
The first almost 7 pts of the rally off the low were all news, THEN I can see technicals (and momentum from the news) took over. To me, techincally speaking, I had 34.75 as the printed price which alerted me to get long (news aside). Before that, and before the news, being long was a gamble imo

Quote from JSSPMK:

To put it in layman's terms what you are saying is that you have no clue when it comes to TA, no offense.
More...
 
Quote from Cocaine:

Before that, and before the news, being long was a gamble imo
More...

What is a gamble to you, may not necessarily be so to another person. To assume something you do not fully understand as being a gamble IS naive. You, Sir, are a reactor, I class myself as an anticipator. There is no way you can make judgmental statements based solely on your own research. Could you be wrong? No?

P.S. I assumed you are a Sir :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top