IMO Nysestocks was pointing to a specific technique built around a realistic view of how the markets operate. As he admits he didn't discover it independently but it was shown to him. His posts reflect his stupor for it (new, efficacious discoveries, of potentially great reward, in a field of endeavor which caused pain in the past are always emotionally destabilizing), the conflict between his desire to tell everybody about it and the realization of possibly compromising it, and certainly a fair amount of vanity.
The technique he used I never got but I suspect it was a rather mechanical setup with no clear target indication and probably more like scalping.
More important than the setup is the exhortation to look beyond the official, textbook, view of price dynamics.
IMO a worthwhile pursuit is to understand exactly the how and the why of price movement in realistic terms. Because without a valid interpretative framework one could watch price for years without seeing anything.
Of course we are talking about stops running, about TA signals failures, about how different partipants operate.
It's also about redefining the concepts; I must have picked up from some stupid book that a retracement is "search for support/confirmation". What an idiotic notion is that? A retracement is a shakeout of late entrants! And it's vastly different because you can now relate where the victims entered and based on what! And where their Stops were because price accelerates through them! And how to do be on right side the next time! Yes. The stops may not be known exactly (unless there's foul play...) but with retail traders you have a bunch of, in the vast majority, losing 'traders' whose operation tactics are broadly speaking KNOWN! They are discussed openly, based on simple notions and heavily influenced by emotion. That makes them predictable.
(And if you have the fortune to have consistently lost money in the market you have a powerful edge: you know how losers operate)
Keep reasoning around the central idea of stops running and, for example, the lateral phase which follows large moves is no longer "distribution" as indicated in textbooks, because large positions are better exited against stops runs, where else do you find counterparts? The lateral can now be viewed as market stalling after all stops have been run ...precisely because all stops have been run! Get it?
Speculative reasoning such as above is probably something we could all feel comfortable discussing openly. The precise setups is something each could elaborate privately. After all one of the great competitive disadvantages of retails is the absence of reasoned, critical discussion and reliance on superficial notions that don't pass the the BS detector test.
- ras 72
The technique he used I never got but I suspect it was a rather mechanical setup with no clear target indication and probably more like scalping.
More important than the setup is the exhortation to look beyond the official, textbook, view of price dynamics.
IMO a worthwhile pursuit is to understand exactly the how and the why of price movement in realistic terms. Because without a valid interpretative framework one could watch price for years without seeing anything.
Of course we are talking about stops running, about TA signals failures, about how different partipants operate.
It's also about redefining the concepts; I must have picked up from some stupid book that a retracement is "search for support/confirmation". What an idiotic notion is that? A retracement is a shakeout of late entrants! And it's vastly different because you can now relate where the victims entered and based on what! And where their Stops were because price accelerates through them! And how to do be on right side the next time! Yes. The stops may not be known exactly (unless there's foul play...) but with retail traders you have a bunch of, in the vast majority, losing 'traders' whose operation tactics are broadly speaking KNOWN! They are discussed openly, based on simple notions and heavily influenced by emotion. That makes them predictable.
(And if you have the fortune to have consistently lost money in the market you have a powerful edge: you know how losers operate)
Keep reasoning around the central idea of stops running and, for example, the lateral phase which follows large moves is no longer "distribution" as indicated in textbooks, because large positions are better exited against stops runs, where else do you find counterparts? The lateral can now be viewed as market stalling after all stops have been run ...precisely because all stops have been run! Get it?
Speculative reasoning such as above is probably something we could all feel comfortable discussing openly. The precise setups is something each could elaborate privately. After all one of the great competitive disadvantages of retails is the absence of reasoned, critical discussion and reliance on superficial notions that don't pass the the BS detector test.
- ras 72
