What are some good example of a move where TA has failed?

themickey said:
I better go study charts a bit better to get me a 100% success rate.
More...

I told myself I'd stay out of this thread, but I want to point out that trading is a game of probabilities - like Blackjack or Poker, but with better edges available to the player (trader). Just as a proficient card counter doesn't win 100% of his hands (nor does he need to to be profitable), neither does a proficient technical trader win 100% of his trades (nor does he need to to be profitable).

Now, technical analysis always works, because by definition it is always simply a representation of what has already taken place. But that is not the same as saying it somehow produces 100% correct decisions on the part of the trader. All it can give us is periodic indications, typically brief and fleeting, as to when price has a definite greater chance of going up next rather than down, or down rather than up.

For example, if the ES is making higher highs and higher lows, its first pullback to a 20 ema value will likely result in a reversal back in the direction of the trend and price will likely test its most recent high within a tick or so. That is such a common occurrence that Linda Raschke, who "popularized" that set up, referred to it as "the grail trade." That did not then and does not now mean it is a 100% win rate. In fact, one of my favorite trades is to fade the grail traders who short during bull markets.

Anyhow, I learned long ago that those who understand TA will see its value and use it to their advantage. Those who expect more from it than it is able to promise will disparage it. It doesn't matter a bit. Trade how you wish to trade, and best of luck to all!
 
NQurious said:
I told myself I'd stay out of this thread, but I want to point out that trading is a game of probabilities - like Blackjack or Poker, but with better edges available to the player (trader). Just as a proficient card counter doesn't win 100% of his hands (nor does he need to to be profitable), neither does a proficient technical trader win 100% of his trades (nor does he need to to be profitable).

Now, technical analysis always works, because by definition it is always simply a representation of what has already taken place. But that is not the same as saying it somehow produces 100% correct decisions on the part of the trader. All it can give us is periodic indications, typically brief and fleeting, as to when price has a definite greater chance of going up next rather than down, or down rather than up.

For example, if the ES is making higher highs and higher lows, its first pullback to a 20 ema value will likely result in a reversal back in the direction of the trend and price will likely test its most recent high within a tick or so. That is such a common occurrence that Linda Raschke, who "popularized" that set up, referred to it as "the grail trade." That did not then and does not now mean it is a 100% win rate. In fact, one of my favorite trades is to fade the grail traders who short during bull markets.

Anyhow, I learned long ago that those who understand TA will see its value and use it to their advantage. Those who expect more from it than it is able to promise will disparage it. It doesn't matter a bit. Trade how you wish to trade, and best of luck to all!
More...
Well said, I am rarely tempted to give comprehensive replies any longer to these mindless and repetitive threads.
 
tommcginnis said:
Price action charts will show so-called 'pattern' failures again and again and again. Just put up a chart, cover the screen with a piece of paper, and then 'reveal' it to yourself from left to right. Using 'price action' to predict the next move, you will fail. And fail. And fail.
More...
Trading price action/patterns outside of a constrained and quantified framework doesn’t work. If you can’t explain how you make money, you don’t make money. Every profitable trader, retail or institutional, that I personally know, trades within an objective framework. It can’t be any other way. We’re dealing with a giant random number generator. The pros know and believe this. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just jagging you off.
 
digitalnomad said:
Trading price action/patterns outside of a constrained and quantified framework doesn’t work. If you can’t explain how you make money, you don’t make money. Every profitable trader, retail or institutional, that I personally know, trades within an objective framework. It can’t be any other way. We’re dealing with a giant random number generator. The pros know and believe this. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just jagging you off.
More...
%% Good points i agree; with about 99.95% that.
Stock market is not random, neither bull market nor bear market. NOT a prediction+ not random.
Of course bear markets have panic sellers that never win.+ forced/planned selling;
but even then ,a fund may not want to sell ,but long only fund may have no choice.And then there are pros like Carl Ichan rather than ''gate '' his fund customers; he allowed redemptions, but did not sell-got the money from another account.
So even my ''forced selling '' comment is still a choice/plan.And as you noted digital nomad;over time sure has generated giant number s.......................................................................:cool::cool:
 
I was throwing out some bait and got a good strike, thanks for some fun suckers. :)
To OP, TA can't fail, it isnt green light red light, TA is a nebulous term, it can mean anything to anyone.
Just the act of looking at a chart can mean TA, running some numbers on a spreadsheet too.
If you programed an algo with TA indicators (no emotions, no human intervention), most will fail sometime if not immediately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top