I have posted some of the best set ups , learn them and you won't need to rely on anybody else to prove anything.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=247783
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=235274
What is TA?
- Thread starter kut2k2
- Start date
I have posted some of the best set ups , learn them and you won't need to rely on anybody else to prove anything.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=247783
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=235274
You've been here since 2011. Don't you even read the trade journals section, trading section and other threads where folks are posting trades in advance.
It's been done here at ET and its an old broken record to see your types of replies about such. Yet, I'll cut you some slack because maybe you have all of them (those that have posted trade signals in advance) on your ignore list which is why you're unable to read their posts.
Quote from wrbtrader:
You've been here since 2011. Don't you even read the trade journals section, trading section and other threads where folks are posting trades in advance.
It's been done here at ET and its an old broken record to see your types of replies about such. Yet, I'll cut you some slack because maybe you have all of them (those that have posted trade signals in advance) on your ignore list which is why you're unable to read their posts.
No, this isn't accurate. They all have a run, then fizzle out very quickly if they existed at all. Start a journal now, and prove me wrong. Not just you WRB, but any TA user. Before the fact calls. No excuses or fraudulent after the fact claims
With respect, surf
Now back to the storm.
Ps. Most traders are smart people. They understand survivorship bias when it comes to trading and trading journals. Those on a run keep posting whereas those who start losing stop posting. Even with this said, I never recall a real tome before the fact TA journal. In fact, the past nature of TA would make this impossible. Surf
I completely disagree or maybe there's a misunderstanding.
Maybe you're asking for someone specific or you should specifically mention names instead of saying They all have a run because it seems like the existing journals or message posts by others are not good enough for folks like you that are occurring here at ET. Further, FreakofNature specifically asked for a few swing trade calls.
Yet, Oilxpro replied to FreakofNature with his own link of a recent swing trade call and I believe its an ongoing thread that Oilxpro plans to continue. Yet, I think Oilxpro is disqualified because I was under the impression he uses TA and think its useful but also attacks it too. Thus, maybe he has one foot in the TA camp and the other foot in the TA basher camp.
Also, there are "before the fact" calls in the ES Journal. Yeah...sure, not every post in that journal are "before the fact" calls but many are and how many years has that journal been around...many years.
Will I post a direct link to that ES Journal for you ? No...go click around ET by yourself and do your own research. Yet, I will help you the link @ http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/search.php?s=
Yet, as I stated above, if you're pointing your finger specifically at someone, that's someone I do not know about and you should be very clear whom you're talking about. However, if you're asking does anyone do it...the answer is YES and I gave you the specific name of such a journal. I'll help you along via giving you the location via http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=29 but you need to read to find what you ask for. However, if you're also asking for access to the details of their TA, I think someone's prior answer to you to go $#ck off should have been clear enough to you.
Secondly, FreakofNature asked for Swing Trades...I do not swing trade but I do day trade and I guess that disqualifies me.
Thirdly, as someone has stated specifically too you in another thread. I have a day trade journal of real-time trades with statements since 2002...just not here at ET (e.g. its elsewhere). Therefore, I guess that disqualifies me again and many other ET members that know ET isn't the only parc in town.
Also, unless I'm mistaken, I think I saw you requesting "before the fact" calls and you used the word forex (please correct me if I'm wrong). That too disqualifies many (including myself) and I will tell you up front...I only know of one location where traders are posting "before the fact" calls involving Forex and that's over at ForexFactory.com
Note To Moderators: Please do not delete my message post because I mention a competitor of ET. Instead, just edit out the above paragraph like you guys have been doing recently in the past year.
Fourth, as I specifically stated to you in another thread...I know some ET members that post there real-time signals or before the fact signals on the Othernet, Financialchat for many years. It's not too complicated to look up the Othernet and Financial servers on Google and how to log on...these are free resources too that's a favorite of many traders that use technical analysis. Once again, you seem to believe someone isn't doing such...that is an illusion that you have or want to have.
P.S. Joe (ET management) use to visit where I use to post my real-time trades and statements many years ago during a time when you started running around in saying stuff like nobody is able to do such. He would hang around for awhile, watch the action and then leave. Yeah, he'll just show up to tell folks about something going on at ET that may be worthwhile checking out.
Wake up surf, ET isn't the only parc in town.
P.S.S. You should give a specific hypothetical example of a "before the fact" call that you desire to see/read that will satisfy your curiosity. Its possible your lack of examples of what you're looking for is the reason why those others that you're talking about haven't step up to the plate for you.
Example: JoeBob - I will buy Forex EurUsd tomorrow @ 1.2480 and will sell it if/when it hits 80 pips.
It can't hurt for you to give a specific hypothetical example so that we'll know exactly what you're talking about...right ?
Yes, survivorship bias runs rampant in trading, and that's why it's important for any aspiring trader to collect hard statistics to back up any ideas they may have for a business plan.
However, the TA naysayers are guilty of their own bias here, confirmation bias, which ensures that they will always be right no matter what sort of proof to the contrary is offered.
TA Naysayer: "Nobody calls TA trades in advance for any length of time."
With "any length of time" being defined as "a length of time that proves TA works"
TA Trader: "Fred posted live calls in advance for months proving how well TA works."
TA Naysayer: "Well, he's not posting now so it obviously quit working."
TA Trader: "Phil's been posting advance TA-based calls on ETcompetitor.com since March 2009 and is generating a return of more than 400% annually."
TA Naysayer: "Anyone can make money in a bull market. Let's see how he does when market conditions change!"
Say someone then offers proof of profitable TA-based trading through bull and bear:
TA Trader: "Linda's been using TA to trade profitably for nearly 20 years and posted copies of her statements to prove it."
TA Naysayer: "Photoshopped."
TA Trader: "I requested audited statements before joining her live trading room and she provided them."
TA Naysayer: "Yeah...well...Enron provided lots of audited statements and you see how well that worked out."
TA Trader: "Wow, you're right! Thank you so much for opening my eyes. I can see that there really is no proof that trading based on technical analysis is any better than a coin toss! First thing in the morning I'm going to donate my fortune to Gambler's Anonymous!"
+1
You're spot on. Yet, the problem is that surf or others only want proof from those they're currently debating with in some particular thread and only want that proof posted here at Elitetrader.com for easy reading (they don't want to use any search tools to go find it).
Note: Preferably with the in-depth details of how TA is being used. A few of the TA naysayers have admitted with their own words that they are looking for such.
Simply, proof outside of ET and/or from someone else that's not debating with them doesn't count. Why do they not want to go outside of ET ? They know those other resources are well moderated and will ban them in a heartbeat or run them out of town sort'uv speak if they go there and post the same crap as they easily get away with posting here at ET.
It was a mistake to mention astrology. I was trying to deal with the TA haters who love to compare TA to astrology.Quote from wrbtrader:
My point is this again, everybody has their own definition and walking around telling others that their definition or TA is incorrect. This is the reason for the constant ongoing debates and will continue to be so...traders do not or have difficulty to accept definitions, interpretations, application of others. Each person telling the other its obviously incorrect.
That's why there's infinite number of methods and applications out there which is silly when you hear/read someone say...I've tested it all.
Never heard the astrology connection nor did I read such in this thread by someone as a definition. Yet, I have heard someone talk about "moon cycles" here once at ET.
P.S. Isn't it funny that those that do use TA...seem to not agree on the definition of TA. Simply, this is not just an issue that those against TA are having a problem with.
Anyway ...
The whole point of dictionaries and glossaries is to standardize the meanings of words so we can communicate effectively. You keep bringing up the different definitions as if it's nothing more than arguing over sport teams. Wrong. There are such things as correct definitions and incorrect definitions. Professionals in every field all agree upon a clearly defined jargon to mark themselves as people to be taken seriously. It is a major strike against TA if we can't even agree that there should be a clear and comprehensive definition of TA even if we don't agree on as yet.
I'm not sure why you're saying its wrong considering this thread is proof that even TA believers don't agree on the same TA definition. Don't you remember telling a few TA believers in this thread that they are wrong when they posted their definition ?
That's my point exactly. Why do you expect to challenge the TA bashers about their definition of TA when TA believers themselves aren't on the same page ???
Sorry but you're completely wrong. Regarding astrology, dates and times are part of price data and volume data (how could they not be? we're talking about time series afterall). But locations have nothing to do with prices or volumes.Quote from jcl:
Sorry, that conclusion is incorrect - at least it does not follow from your TA definition.
Astrology does not use star charts, it uses only date, time, and location. So you could as well say that date, time, and location can not be used in TA. If you followed that line of argument, mathematics and statistics could not be used either.
A correct definition is: TA is an algorithmic method for predicting price data.
"Algorithmic" means that the method can be completely described with a finite algorithm. Intuition, psychic readings, or analyzing the news can not be part of TA. But other data than price or volume - for instance, quote frequency, or the NYSE opening and closing time - is used in TA.
How you made the leap to mathematics and statistics is a complete non sequitur, but for the record: math and stat are not data, they are methods of data analysis, and I clearly said "method" in my definition.
Your definition of TA is wrong because (a) there is such a thing as discretionary (aka intuitive) TA and (b) I've never tried to predict price data in my life, yet I've developed a very successful TA-based trading strategy.