A few funds use similar ideas, they just don't talk bout it or have the idea named. Yes, it's brand spanking new... You heard it here first and are welcome.
Why does TA not work (for you)?
- Thread starter Xspurt
- Start date
A few funds use similar ideas, they just don't talk bout it or have the idea named. Yes, it's brand spanking new... You heard it here first and are welcome.
No, it can't be quantified in the sense of coming up with a single number like you seem to want. But, there is an underlying "logic" to it (that's why I chose my name, because this "logic" is the basis of my analysis). A "trend" is really 3 segments, a beginning, a middle and an end. The necessary "logical" features of each of these three segments can each be categorized and rules to identify the first moment when a "beginning" might be occurring and when the "middle" becomes "the end" can be put in place. In my mind, what this "logic" does is enable market action that seems different on the surface to be comparable on as much of an "apples-to-apples" basis as possible. To me, this comparison is the crux of identifying trading opportunities. You almost have to look at the market as much as a philosopher would as you have to look at it like a mathematician would. Fortunately, my academic background includes a lot of both, so I can do this relatively easily.
Once the logical requirements for the beginning of a trend have been met, there are two potential outcomes. The first is that the trend does exist and result in a profitable trade. The second is that the trend exists, but is too weak to result in a profitable trade. This is the uncertainty inherent in my analysis.
There is a third type of trend which begins without meeting the logical requirements. However, these trends can be identified by the fact that they don't meet the logical requirements. They can therefore be avoided and the trader remains out of the market during these types of trend. They don't result in any trade triggers, they just sort of play out with me on the sidelines. All it takes is a little patience to wait for them and then see if they impact the analysis for the next potential trend.
Within those trends, there are trade management rules, some of which come into play even before the trade is entered, as a way of avoiding "false positive" trade triggers.
It's all very tight and logical and, most importantly, profitable.
So, the reason I rewrote the definition was so that it would fit what I do better.
In the end, I have to either believe you or believe my own experience. That's a debate you cannot win.
Logicman, there is no sense, well, being logical here with regards to how you trade. Some people are just too set in their ways and are too scarred from past unsuccessful experiences that they would rather keep wool over their eyes than be proven incorrect. For some, this would be too much to bear.
Im not interested in savants, wizards, claims of greatness, magical thinking, or anything else non quantifiable. If it can't be quantified, then by definition you can not assign probabilities but I am always hearing about "probabilities" in TA talk, even your own post.
You TAer's sound like the flat earth society-- lots of rhetoric, lots of "i know this guy" or "I do it" but no facts, no evidence, no nothing.
I don't discount the fact that there may be TA savants who use certain abilities intuition--- but this is the outlier and can't be quantified.
So carry on Wizards , magicmen and shaman of the market-----
You just said yesterday that your magical price drive system doesn't use quantifiable exits. You said it all depends on the trader to determine when/where to exit.
"You can quantify exits based on your own criteria--- ie-- how much you are willing to lose/win--- I can't do that for you-- so its subjective based on your goals. I guess you could call it personally quantified."
Sounds like EXACTLY what I do, personally quantified exits.
"You can quantify exits based on your own criteria--- ie-- how much you are willing to lose/win--- I can't do that for you-- so its subjective based on your goals. I guess you could call it personally quantified."
Sounds like EXACTLY what I do, personally quantified exits.
This is the problem with certain people. No matter what you would be willing to provide, it will never be enough. A brokerage statement....it must be photo shopped. A P&L screenshot from the day....also photo shopped. A few live trades....oh those were lucky.....some more good trades.....try and do it for a month they say.....and the list goes on and on. You can never satisfy people who so desperately cling to their deeply ingrained beliefs.
Quote from cornixforex:
What are you ready to sacrifice to get the best form of evidence possible - decent amount of live calls, made before the fact as you like?
Not at all. Just show me, a series of before the fact calls, in a journal here for 90 days. It's really easy to convince me that you have something--- however, in 10 years on elite, NO ONE has even provided this-- always excuses. You up for it? I can take the results, crunch them, and determine if they are outside of the realm of randomness-- if they are, I'll be happy to admit....
See, I want to find systems, edges, methods that work-- its how I make a portion of my income--by introducing people, and placing capital---