Why does TA not work (for you)?

there are many poeple posting here who have the clue needed to have precise systems.

I track about a dozen to see the next addition each needs.

I also put these sysems on a spectrum.

here is how it looks after 54 years of watching.

Not many good systems overlap.

It is not possible to fill in a gap between systems to get them to work together.

Of all the procedural clues for designing and developing a system the Behavioral Finance sites comes the closest. Its short peice called" BF or BS" is the coolest.

The random char put up by the denver coin tosser dmonstrates that any data stream can be handled bar by bar and ooperate to take the full offer of that system.

For ridiculousness, the 5,000 rules examination takes the cake for stupidity of reasoning.

In my opinion the simpls way to become independentt is to have a stock universe and position trade it. The table for doing that was inventede and then 400,000 samples, showed (inductively (ugh)) that no cells needed to be changed. It makes about 10% evey 4 to 6 days.

An SQL language type code can be used and their is only one look up table.

There are many prints of its use.

Finally, surf is a very huge example of why TA does not work for just anyone. ET has provided a huge benefit to its readers because of the most thorough scope and bounding of surf that many many have contributed to.
 
If you learned how to read the mkts, you wouldn't HAVE to believe. You would know it's possible because you would see it with your own eyes.

But why do that, you have your price drivers strategy. You should just focus on that, don't you think?

Quote from marketsurfer:

I don't believe any past price data can be used to create greater odds of a move continuing or failing. surf
More...
 
Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

If you learned how to read the mkts, you wouldn't HAVE to believe. You would know it's possible because you would see it with your own eyes.

But why do that, you have your price drivers strategy. You should just focus on that, don't you think?
More...


"read the markets". That sure sounds intuitive or skill based. I have no issue with intuitive TA. It can't be tested, I would never use it, but if it works for you, I have no reason to argue. But why you , logic , and the rest of the TA brigade does not admit this and insists its objective and programmable. Is what I don't understand. NoDoji admits to intuition.
 
Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

...You would know it's possible because you would see it with your own eyes....
More...

(He doesn't know what to look for. Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees.)
 
Quote from the1:

Pretty simply, the study of past performance to predict (hate that word) the probable direction of future price movements. All types of analysis generally do the same thing but certain aspects of different types of analysis set them apart from TA. IMO...the biggest flaw with TA is it leads a trader to take one position or the other -- long or short. Advanced trading moves far beyond the simple buying or selling of a security.

As a brief example, what is the correlation between Gold and Silver? Is there a trade that involves being long one and short the other? What is the leverage? To balance (minimize your risk) what size position do you take in each. What about bond futures? There's a multitude of opportunities with those instruments.

Technical Analysis doesn't even enter this realm. The market is one gigantic random number generator and as such, the best tools for analyzing such a beast is Statistical Analysis. Computational Finance and Stochastic Calculus are extremely valuable tools. I took 3 semesters and 2 semesters, respectively. The education I received in this program has paid for itself many, many times over.

If you want to be successful in the markets you have understand and use the tools that your strongest competitors are using.

<i>"Why does TA not work (for you)?"</i> Because it is an inferior strategy and it's used by the masses. What does that tell you when the losing rate is generally accepted as 95% and my guess is 95% of traders use TA and nothing else.

Just think about being long the 5-year and short the 30-year, for example, and then pulling in the 10-year for shits and giggles. What is the relationship between all these instruments. What do you do when they generate an outlier? What can be accomplished by taking positions in these instruments in different time frames (expiration dates)?

<b>Trading is limited only by your imagination and your acumen for mathematics. </b> Learn to move beyond being long or short an instrument with a stop. Stops generate losses due to the random element of the market. Managing risk through spreads and such do not involve stops. Average up? Average down? It's truly limitless!
More...

I like this post. It is how it is for the followers of the CW.
 
I already told you some pages ago how my method uses objective entries, based on bar's OHLC in a certain sequence. Once I have that sequence, I use A, B and C criteria. If those ALSO align, in combination with the OHLC sequence a trade is placed. 100% objective and non random.

But this system was ONLY possible once I understood how to read the mkts. I used this knowledge to build an objective trading method. All based on the TA I put together.

Quote from marketsurfer:

"read the markets". That sure sounds intuitive or skill based. I have no issue with intuitive TA. It can't be tested, I would never use it, but if it works for you, I have no reason to argue. But why you , logic , and the rest of the TA brigade does not admit this and insists its objective and programmable. Is what I don't understand. NoDoji admits to intuition.
More...
 
Quote from NoDoji:

What I did personally is I captured screen shots of my chosen setups at the right edge of a live chart and printed them out and studied them until they were ingrained in my mind's eye. You then learn to recognize and trust your setups in real time when they look "scary".
More...

This is great advice, NoD.




While I was developing my trading plan, I Skyped with a small group of traders every day, all day. When someone asked me "Why'd you take that setup, but not this one, they look about the same?" I wanted to find a quantifiable reason for it, because I thought it was just gut feel similar to what CF says. But I was able to quantify where that gut feel came from and by doing that I honed my trading plan further. Now I have exact price levels in my head at all time, so what may appear totally random to an outside observer has a precise reason that I have in the form of a written plan.
More...

Frankly, I never say it's "just gut feel", but usually when asked and can't exactly describe my internal thinking algorithm in a particular case, say that I will try to explain as well as I can, but ask readers to give me more questions if something is unclear. :)
 
Just lazy people who think the market is totally random just because they haven't figured out a way to consistently profit from it. Typical defense mechanism.

Quote from kut2k2:

Absolutely dead wrong, and as a result, so is all the rest of what you wrote.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top