Why Can't I Trade with the Trend

[ProfLogic]

Quote from ktmexc20:

Hi Prof,

Respectfully disagree! Price (as in: change in price) is a by-product. The effect of the cause...so to speak. Kind of like the CO emitted from gas guzzlers.

I agree with (change in price).

 

[Dell-Boy]

Quote from PoundTheRock:

If I couldn't trade what I thought, then I couldn't trade what I see.

 

[Dell-Boy]

When you make a call that drags in 30-35 points,Then you can take the piss out of my comments

 

[Everest]

Quote from NickelScalper:

The reason trendies run into trouble is that they look at price as dependent only on time.

Bollocks.

 

[Dell-Boy]

Quote from spike500:

As daytrader i look for the trend on 60 minutes charts; look for entry points on 15 minutes charts; and fine tune on 3 minutes charts.

I don't scalp, i try to take the maximum ride. Today short at 1217 (ES june 2005) and still short. The profit is in the big moves, not in the scalps.

Good call spike , I went short at 1216 ,H/S on 60 chart with a down slope was good confirmation to get in early on the move,I use 60 ,10, 5,

 

[Cutten]

Quote from hank rollins:

i don't believe your formulations are applicable to the issue at hand.

applying basic statistical measures like the serial correlation coefficient or the goodman independent time series test to most any market series, a trend is not in evidence--even in those cases were a MA indicates trending behavior. the tests show randomness in the data regardless of a "visual" illusionary trend.

You can either apply the accepted tests to the market data, or continue to believe whatever you wish.


I would love to see any data that refutes the above--- it would sure make my life easier
best wishes,

Hello Hank. Can you take a look at the price action of the Tokyo Stock Exchange 2nd section Index from early 2003 onwards. By my definition there were two clear trends there - can you examine the data and see if they would qualify under your tests?

 

[Cutten]

Quote from NickelScalper:

My claim for the theory of efficiency is that it applies with reasonable accuracy. Perfection is not required in the present discussion.

There is no such thing as "reasonably accurate" efficiency. 99.9% efficiency is inefficiency, since the state has changed from one where profit is impossible (100% efficiency) to one where profit is possible (<100% efficiency).

Your claim is like saying someone is "almost a virgin".

 

[kiwi_trader]

or "a little bit pregnant" ?

 

[WilliamV]

I throughly enjoyed reading every single post in this thread and I'm fascinated by the entire discussion.

I've come away with the following preliminary conclusions: Need to give more weight to volume in determining trend strength or it's reversal and not using it alone but with other factors. Time is also extremely important. Adaptive MA's could help point the way.

When something is in motion, it tends to stay in motion, at which a point comes when last majority crowd on the ride causes an opposite reaction. Trends do exist and when they are present they affect future price action, increasing it's predictability.

I think the major difference that exists between the approaches presented here is detecting the shift in trend the quickest, increasing return.

 

[j1900q]

it is ok to trade against the trend. Just know be quick in and quick out. Take small gains, and never trade without a stop. If you do trade against the trend, sell where everybody else is selling. For me, es, overnight high, high of yest, high of last week, or obvious support resistance areas. For buys of course, do just the opposite. Have a great day.
Keith