trend following delusion shattered
- Thread starter hank rollins
- Start date
- Status
what you need to understand is our fine professor logic truly believes he can forecast with great accuracy future price by using past price and support/ resistance.
he has actually posted a bizzare challenge , that can be found here, http://www.logicalmarkettrends.com/Logical Challenge.htm . it appears that the challenge is for someone to prove the market does not move up and down given that there is no quantification of last prime, minor support/ resistance as worded within the challenge.
i guess this type of public delusion is what makes the market work. the honorable professor has my thanks for perpetuating myths and other ballyhoo.
hank
Hanksurfer,
Could you please answer the question I asked in my post on page 136 of this thread? Just curious.
Could you please answer the question I asked in my post on page 136 of this thread? Just curious.
Quote from Thunderdog:
A thought just occurred to me regarding the belief in trends and trend trading, implicit or otherwise. If anyone has ever added to an existing profitable position (either in pyramid form or in any other configuration), then it seems to me that such persons not only believe in trends, but also act on those beliefs.
Therefore, the question is: do any of you folks who think that trend trading is bogus ever add to existing profitable positions?
you are missing a fundamental tenent in my statement as the above question indicates. the question is: can future price be extrapolated by using past price OR when one enters a trade in the direction of a past trend, are the odds ACTUALLY any greater of continued movement in the same direction than a reversal at this same point of entry based upon the time frame given to the trade to be profitable? you can witness my oil trade documented publically here and on my site-- i was chastised for going against the multi day trend--- but the trade was made without regard for trend and was nicely succesful--a trend trader trading the same future would be down phat right now.
the trade is profitable because you are with the trend, but trend cant be used extrapolate future price.
there are issues with definitions, even those here who refuse to provide their definiton of trend ( mathmagician ) stating it is proprietary. one is with the trend if the directional trade is profitable, against the trend if it is not, trend only exists subjectively based upon your entry-- anything else is delusion.
hope this makes sense.
Hank, I understand that Statistics are any numerical value, such as standard deviation or mean, that characterizes the sample or group from which it originated. I also understand that Physics, as applied to trading, is the science of matter (price) and energy (supply & demand) and of interactions between the two, grouped in traditional fields such as acoustics, and electromagnetism.
Yes, I understand these things because I taught various applied sciences such as basic Physics, Logic and Rational Analysis at a corporate level. That is where we use them in the real world not in a lab.
My extended research, 9+ years, has been in tracking that matter and energy and plotting it objectively and rationally not sampling it. I learned a long time ago that statistics can skew results if allowed. By taking the results over that 9 year period and documenting the perfect consistencies one no longer has a need for sampling. It is a lot more work but the results are far superior. A statistician like yourself should understand this. But being yourself, it is more fun to ridicule that to admit someone might have more information that you. I've been researching price information longer that you probably went to college and that is object research not statistical sampling. I have been researching object price movement more than anyone else in this industry. Outlandish arrogant statement? No, name one individual that has done the same without sampling or having the system tainted by mixing in unrelated methodologies. You can't. Why can't you just admit there are individuals out there that could have more information at there disposal regarding price oscillation than you and your infamous group.
I also learned manners, taught by my parents and fine tuned in my years on earth. I don't assume the background of any individual. I ask. That way I don't rudely find myself talking down to them. You make fun of information you have no understanding of but those that respect you actually think you know what you are talking about. That is dangerous and the only reason some of us are here. If I don't know or understand something, I admit to it so I can learn something new and expand my horizons.
You are a pompous ass! Of course that is my opinion!
Then we appear to be in general agreement. I suppose my only remaining issue with your thread's title and your initial post is how you define trend trading. It is hard to argue that the trader who is profitable because he is with the trend (per your reference above) is not, in fact, a trend trader. He does not have to extrapolate future price or engage in other forms of clairvoyance in order to catch a low risk entry and then ride a trend. So how is that not trend trading?
Aside from the issue of predicting future prices, which we both seem to agree is largely fruitless, we appear to be otherwise engaged in mere semantics.
As an aside, I find it a bit incongruous that you would (correctly) state that future prices cannot be predicted, yet your old journal here on ET made numerous references to price targets/expectations and so on. Am I missing something?
I've read this entire thread and don't remember anyone chastising you for your short of oil. Please point out the page number please. Whether it was taken from trend or the MA you use but won't admit to, it doesn't matter. You took the trade and profited. Good job! No one here is saying that your methodology doesn't work and you have offered no proof it exists. You know it works and that is all that matters. It has to work. You believe in it and profit from it.
The definitions of trend are not a mystical secret. Bull Trends are price/momentum oscillations making sequential Higher Top Highs and Higher Bottom Lows. Three plus sequential points designate a trend. Bear Trends are price/momentum oscillations making sequential Lower Top Highs and Lower Bottom Lows. Three plus sequential points designate a trend. Trends will continue till they fail to continue. That failure is determined by that same configuration as the above mentioned HH, HL, LH or LL.
Trends exist Objectively not subjectively and just because you don't understand how that is configured doesn't make them a fallacy. I don't understand photosynthesis but I damn sure love my veggies.
- Status