Being small and nimble allows one to react to price action. But to anticipate moves I think is the "holy grail". I guess a combination of the two is most appropriate. Anticipate but be ready to change your mind and react quickly.
It all comes down to trading the plan and planning the trade - in advance. Trying to react to price movement without either will result in over trading and mounting losses.
You don't need Reaction if you have the supernatural ability to 100% predict Anticipation. Either Or questions in trading is rather close-minded, you should always think dynamically, variably...Grey, always somewhere percolating in the middle.
Reaction! Placing a trade on Anticipation will cost you big time over the long run because the market often does what is least expected. Placing trades on Reaction means you are trading on confirmation, the secret is to move very fast in order to get max purchasing power. If the trade fails immediately (not that common) you can bail out nigh on unscathed. Reaction has higher probability than anticipation imo. A trade failing on anticipation has more downside in terms of price negativity than a trade failing on reaction imo.
One person on ET told me that anticipation/prediction is for losers, reaction is also for losers. You need to do something obvious.
It needn't be one or the other. Anticipate those levels or zones or points at which you expect traders to behave a certain way -- such as yesterday's high -- and then react appropriately if and when that behavior exhibits itself. If they instead give it a yawn, then stand down.
I dont see how reacting can be for losers. It is something that must be done if trading a discretionary method. I think the question is if there is room for anticipatating (predicting) a certain outcomes based on what you see in the price action. I am refering to price action indicative of accumulation / distribution. Can you even make such a judgement without seeing the confirmation (breakout) first and then reacting?