# 16. I don't know everything and am always learning more about the financial markets. The process of evolving is never ending as a student of the markets.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What Marketsurfer Believes
- Thread starter marketsurfer
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
You've come to the point where you are arguing for the sake of arguing and that is really a waste of time.
Your mentor has identified trends, accepts that this is non-random in nature, and has satisfied himself that this is so by his use of statistics. It is quite clear.
All you can say in rebuttal is I don't understand. It's the same with every fanatic, when they run out of things to justify their position, they say you don't understand.
I'm done with this.
See number 16. Peace and happy easter!
What marketsurfer's mentor says:
What marketsurfer sees:
What marketsurfer's mentor says:
What fortydraws says: I do not recall having read any trend follower claim to know before hand the extent and duration of any potential future trend. So use a trailing stop - no Ph.D. required.
I have never found a movement in prices that anyone could make money with by a trend following method that didn’t also show a major departure from randomness revealed by the standard statistical measures I mentioned.
What marketsurfer sees:
I have never found a movement in prices that anyone could make money with.
What marketsurfer's mentor says:
The tragedy is the mysticism and blind acceptance of trendism, that trend following exponents proclaim, without any evidence as to magnitude and uncertainty.
What fortydraws says: I do not recall having read any trend follower claim to know before hand the extent and duration of any potential future trend. So use a trailing stop - no Ph.D. required.
What marketsurfer's mentor says:
What marketsurfer sees:
What marketsurfer's mentor says:
What fortydraws says: I do not recall having read any trend follower claim to know before hand the extent and duration of any potential future trend. So use a trailing stop.
What he means is that there are periods of non-randomness, i think, but identifying these periods before they are over is not possible. They are only identifiable in hindsight therefore irrelevant to making decisions. Remembet, when i talk about markets being random, i am talking about for the practicality of trading -- its not a causality vs deterministic argument. Its a practical argument
I don't disagree with you in total. But why not enter long if the market is going up and follow with a trailing stop. Short if the market is dropping, follow with a trailing stop????
I maintain by doing this your results will match or beat any "price action" or TA method that purports to tell you "when" to enter. surf
Last edited:
I don't disagree with you in total. But why not enter long if the market is going up and follow with a trailing stop. Short if the market is dropping, follow with a trailing stop????
I maintain by doing this your results will match or beat any "price action" or TA method that purports to tell you "when" to enter. surf
Well, if you go just that far, then I would say that perhaps the gap between what you think and the price action approach of a Jesse Livermore or Richard Wyckoff or Richard Schabacker is perhaps not as wide as you yourself might believe.
Well, if you go just that far, then I would say that perhaps the gap between what you think and the price action approach of a Jesse Livermore or Richard Wyckoff or Richard Schabacker is perhaps not as wide as you yourself might believe.
Interesting. Then why use charts at all? Just pick some time frame-- for example, if at the end of a 15 minute time frame, price is higher than the start, go long. Or end of a day , or whatever.
Interesting. Then why use charts at all? Just pick some time frame-- for example, if at the end of a 15 minute time frame, price is higher than the start, go long. Or end of a day , or whatever.
Let's agree first as to what charts depict. Charts are merely one way of recording, organizing, and presenting data. I'm sure your mentor, for example, has created and used charts over the course of his academic career. I know many (most?) message board posters seem to imbue their charts with a life of their own and meanings they are sure exist independently of their own minds. But, imo, that is too much. All charts do, imo, is record transaction data. I would assume that you too would agree that that is all a chart really does - record data. Agree?
"Price being higher now" is of course relative to where price was 15 minutes ago, or a day ago, or whatever. So what you propose is still data dependent. And it does not matter, imo, whether that data came to be known by you through watching a time and sales window, or watching a trading DOM, or a periodic phone call from your broker, or viewing a scrolling electronic ticker on your Bloomberg machine, or, for that matter, a chart. Agree?
I'm just looking for common ground here. I'm not looking to change your or anyone else's view. I am curious to see just how far apart you might be from a "dyed in the wool" price action trader. So I'll stop here for now, and wait for your reply. And if we do agree that charts themselves are just one of many ways one can record transaction data, and that price data, (regardless of the source [so long as it is accurate] or method of recording that data for future review) is necessary to make your own decision as to transact or not, we would have the basis to continue a little longer without either one having to appear silly.
In the mean time, have a Happy Easter!
What he means is that there are periods of non-randomness, i think, but identifying these periods before they are over is not possible. They are only identifiable in hindsight therefore irrelevant to making decisions. surf
I replied before I saw you edit. We can address this too going forward.
Let's agree first as to what charts depict. Charts are merely one way of recording, organizing, and presenting data. I'm sure your mentor, for example, has created and used charts over the course of his academic career. I know many (most?) message board posters seem to imbue their charts with a life of their own and meanings they are sure exist independently of their own minds. But, imo, that is too much. All charts do, imo, is record transaction data. I would assume that you too would agree that that is all a chart really does - record data. Agree?
"Price being higher now" is of course relative to where price was 15 minutes ago, or a day ago, or whatever. So what you propose is still data dependent. And it does not matter, imo, whether that data came to be known by you through watching a time and sales window, or watching a trading DOM, or a periodic phone call from your broker, or viewing a scrolling electronic ticker on your Bloomberg machine, or, for that matter, a chart. Agree?
I'm just looking for common ground here. I'm not looking to change your or anyone else's view. I am curious to see just how far apart you might be from a "dyed in the wool" price action trader. So I'll stop here for now, and wait for your reply. And if we do agree that charts themselves are just one of many ways one can record transaction data, and that price data, (regardless of the source [so long as it is accurate] or method of recording that data for future review) is necessary to make your own decision as to transact or not, we would have the basis to continue a little longer without either one having to appear silly.
In the mean time, have a Happy Easter!
Happy easter to you also! I don't disagree with this post in and of itself.
Jack Hershey passed away, please be respectful!
Did not know this. Thanks for all you freely gave on ET. RIP Jack.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.