"Why Technical Analysis is Nonsense"; Views?

Quote from marketsurfer:

sorry, i tend to prefer consulting quant finance PhD's and statisticians when it comes to the market. if i need to create a powerpoint presentation on a drug company, i'll contact you.

judging from your posts, you have a long way to go in your market education. i once was a TA true believer, so there is hope.

Once again, when TA is tested objectively it fails--- test after test after test. why?? Some ta cult members will tell you the tests are flawed..... what a joke!

surf
More...

Hmm.. funny that.. those Quants came last in this years latest poll on last years returns by type of trader within the Hedge fund community.... Quants and statisticians with access to Dark pools of liquidity came LAST and didnt even outperform the footsie.lol..... and you claim to prefer to consult "those" types seemingly indicative of your distance from them..perhaps...

Ohh and to add more insult to your own self-inflicted injury chart patterns are a form a technical analysis... and there are too many people to mention who have multimillion dollar fortunes based upon chart patterns predominantly... even Dan Zanger as well as others Ive mentioned prove you to be somewhat deluded...
Ill give you this though.. your stubborn and Im not sure that is a vitue in this case..ahh well.. if your making money Market surfer best focus on that than bashing those who make money using T.A. huh.?

RCANFEL & MarketSurfer... you arnt fooling anyone with your allusions to science methods and quants and your Faux intellectual masterbation and lack of judgement about following the heard in the markets... Man such basic mistakes in your approach... it would be interesting to see how exactly you profit from trading information that has no basis in Technical analysis, particularly as you seem to "consult" Quants for your information...when they are already so busy in maths justifying thier salaries on the basis of poor returns this year... especially as they are also not easily accesable outside IBs and Hedgefunds....what a complete pair of jokers you both are...

lol..!!! lol!!
 
If quants are as good as Marketsurfer pretends, then they all should be trading and be rich.
But this is not the case, which proves that Marketsurfer is wrong.

It's funny that there are dummies and dropouts that are able to outperform the super smart quants.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

sorry, i tend to believe quant finance PhD's and statisticians when it comes to the market. if i need to create a powerpoint presentation on a drug company, i'll contact you. you have a long way to go in your market education. i once was a TA true believer, so there is hope.

Once again, when TA is tested objectively it fails--- test after test after test. why??

surf
More...

MS this is a new year and I wish you would turn over a new leaf by only commenting on things you are intimately familiar with.

Technical Analysis (TA) is a vast field of which you have limited knowledge. You have repeatedly stated that you attempted to use some types of TA in some of your past trading endeavors but that was some time ago. You are anything but an expert on all forms of TA or the environments they are tested inside.

Statistical analysis of the markets results in data that can and is interpreted anyway the writer wants it interpreted. Even statisticians understand that their analysis can be skewed to say or mean whatever they want it to. This IS the very nature of statistical analysis. Being a quant PHD in finance only means that individual is an expert at data manipulation. That is hardly something to aspire to. Statisticians could never survive in a computer programming environment because there is ZERO margin for error. Statistical analysis is all about margins of error.

Most TA fails an objective test because the very nature of the test but not all TA fails.
 
Quote from ProfLogic:

MS this is a new year and I wish you would turn over a new leaf by only commenting on things you are intimately familiar with.

Technical Analysis (TA) is a vast field of which you have limited knowledge. You have repeatedly stated that you attempted to use some types of TA in some of your past trading endeavors but that was some time ago. You are anything but an expert on all forms of TA or the environments they are tested inside.



Most TA fails an objective test because the very nature of the test but not all TA fails.
More...



i was a member of the MTA and have published a piece in 2002 defending TA---- how much more knowledgeable of the subject would you like? heck, i even made some killer calls using TA.

however, my evolution as a trader and market student/annalyst
made it clear that TA is not the holy grail but merely a subjective tool that can be used descriptively but not predictively. it is not an objective method that can be tested.

surf
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

i was a member of the MTA and have published a piece in 2002 defending TA---- how much more knowledgeable of the subject would you like? heck, i even made some killer calls using TA.

however, my evolution as a trader and market student/annalyst
made it clear that TA is not the holy grail but merely a subjective tool that can be used descriptively but not predictively. it is not an objective method that can be tested.

surf
More...

I'm a Boy Scout too but don't ask me to start a fire with two sticks. Give me a break.

Analysis and discovery is an ongoing ever changing environment and if you think that just because you wrote an article 6 years ago, the TA world has stood still since then you are sadly mistaken. Six years ago we couldn't successfully clone animals, the processors in today's cell phones are equal to the processors in the average computer 6 years ago and six years ago we were in the closing stages of an extended Bear move of the markets.

Technology changes daily and you either stay up with it or you don't. You aren't evolving as an analyst of the markets, you have stagnated into believing that nothing changes. What you used to use that was a type of TA stopped working for you at some point so now, to you it is all crap because you stopped evolving. That is your problem not the analytical environment. What you used wasn't objective but that doesn't make all TA subjective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top