Why Do We Trade? For Real.

marketsurfer · Mar 12, 2015

lucysparabola said:
Are the naysayers of TA suggesting that if one has variables / indicators created by him/herself that have passed statistical measures run by him/herself and not made available to others - which provide a mathematical edge in the long term - that these are charlatans and mindless sheep?

Surely not, but if so, then.. lol.

I can see that POV if you are speaking strictly about TA which is available to the public - however I see both sides of that fence.

Peace-- statistics are statistics-- there is no such thing as personalized testing-- this is what separates truth from fanciful thinking. It's easy to be fooled by randomness--- many smart people have been .... surf

marketsurfer · Mar 12, 2015

dbphoenix said:
Depends on who "they" is. I "predicted" that the NQ would turn at or about 4500. It turned at 4483. I then "predicted" that we would work our way toward the median of its weekly trend channel, and we are currently within 30pts of that objective.

Anyone who doesn't know what to do with this information ought to find some other means of earning money.

Nostradamus? How many times previous have you been wrong?

dbphoenix · Mar 12, 2015

lucysparabola said:
Are the naysayers of TA suggesting that if one has variables / indicators created by him/herself that have passed statistical measures run by him/herself and not made available to others - which provide a mathematical edge in the long term - that these are charlatans and mindless sheep?

Surely not, but if so, then.. lol.

I can see that POV if you are speaking strictly about TA which is available to the public - however I see both sides of that fence.

It would help if "TA" were defined, but, yes, pretty much.

lucysparabola · Mar 12, 2015

no Surf, no wars here. But if you say statistics are statistics, then would not their results be the same if documented by a few vs documented by thousands?

lucysparabola · Mar 12, 2015

dbphoenix said:
It would help if "TA" were defined, but, yes, pretty much.

See, that's the disconnect. TA is so broad. I don't even know if my stuff would qualify as TA... but I know that it wins in the long run and that's why I trade.

(hooray for relevant response to the OP!)

dbphoenix · Mar 12, 2015

marketsurfer said:
Nostradamus? Dude, you have special powers.

No, I just know how to draw a trend channel. Anyone can do it. If they can draw a straight line.

marketsurfer · Mar 12, 2015

lucysparabola said:
no Surf, no wars here. But if you say statistics are statistics, then would not their results be the same if documented by a few vs documented by thousands?

Yes, but the problem it really isn't documented by a few. If these folks are tellign the truth, its like a lottery winner saying he choose his numbers by some formula and if you use it you will win also. it makes no sense. surf

cornix · Mar 12, 2015

dbphoenix said:
It would be nice, though, to discuss it rationally and logically rather than transform it into a platform for proselytizing one's agenda.

Absolutely agree. However, we must work with whatever we have in reality.

dbphoenix · Mar 12, 2015

lucysparabola said:
See, that's the disconnect. TA is so broad. I don't even know if my stuff would qualify as TA... but I know that it wins in the long run and that's why I trade.

(hooray for relevant response to the OP!)

Actually, it's not so broad. It began with the study of price behavior then diverted into patterns and indicators. But patterns and indicators are both intended to "work" due to changes in price behavior.

dbphoenix · Mar 12, 2015

cornix said:
Absolutely agree. However, we must work with whatever we have in reality.

You're the OP. It's up to you.