don't forget the fact this is another technical tool that everyone uses or at least looks at to level set
It sounds like you just want to de-bunk Fibonacci. Fibonacci works a great deal of times because traders use those levels - just like support and resistance, just like trendlines, just like other TA tools. Why do you need justification? If you are interested in using Fibs, then study them - there are many sources. parttimetrader.com posts a free commentary every week using Fib analysis, and tradethemove.com has a methodology that is built around Fibs and works very good in my experience. If you think it is mumbo/jumbo, don't waste your time.
It sounds like you just want to de-bunk Fibonacci. Fibonacci works a great deal of times because traders use those levels - just like support and resistance, just like trendlines, just like other TA tools. Why do you need justification? Fibonacci as a mystical and special series of numbers is debunked in math and physics. I asked the question of why they would be special in the markets because I really don't know why people think they are. Has it been proven anywhere by anybody? I don't know what I would be trying to debunk. All i know right now is that some people think the ratio has some significance in retracements. Is there anything else? There is some software (Advanced Get?) that is said to be very good. I sat in a traders office and watched his Tradestation charts projecting "wavefronts" based on fibs in realtime, the accuracy was downright unreal. I never got the details of what he was doing, he was finding trades that no system I have to this day can find however. the problem with anecdotes like that is there's no explaination or details, for all we know the wavefronts and fibs were just a front explaination to cover up the real algorithm. It reminds me of the old Pattern Probability Recognizer- real hot in its day. Yes, because rogue experts with internet pages hold the real key to truth and knowledge. http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djub...arthsociety.htm John, I have no idea what the point of this post is, flat earth and all... for some they do, and for some they don't, but note, it's the ratio, not a number series derived from the ratio that's the more useful for projecting accurate future price targets. wallace, you have it backwards- the ratio derives from the series (not vice versa) in the limit of large numbers. notice how off the 'golden ratio' is for the numbers less than 50. Notice too that many others series of numbers converge to the same ratio, like the Lucas series, it is simply a property of the recursion relation - nothing special there. If you are interested in using Fibs, then study them - there are many sources. parttimetrader.com posts a free commentary every week using Fib analysis, and tradethemove.com has a methodology that is built around Fibs and works very good in my experience. oh please man, for just $125 I can learn all about it.... Because that is what the market believes, and the market is never wrong. sure whatever, but what if everyone traded using these retracements? would not others simply start to fade it and destroy its predictability?
here's an observation- there aint no way every single retracement is given exactly by any golden ratio. I think we all can agree on that. So is there a possibility that anything that 'retraces' by roughly 2/3 would be pronounced Fibonacci? How strong would confirmation bias play a role and if you think about how wide a range of values around 2/3 we might call Fibo then is it any surprise? that's not a debunking, just a thought. If it does work then what are the underpinnings of why? oh, why am i doing this? Intellectual curiosity as i like to understand all I can. Not trying to trade with this.
The problem is currently folks are having problems, and that too not always, in projecting the future Fib targets and turns but when you look in the retrospect the Fibs behavior can be well understood and explained. I myself do not use Fibs but am waiting for something real substaintial that would make trading much more confident. Infact, most of the successful traders that I have come across or heard about are heavy into Elliot Waves and Fibs. Although I do not find Robert Precther the EW Guru to be very accurate and relaible. The best way to be successful in trading is to surrender to the market i.e. do not develop any opinions and stick to them while you are fighting the market movement all along. Old and simple sayings like Trend is your friend, Cut your losses short and let your profits run etc. can be the best tools to be in the 5% winner group in trading. Numbers are very very important, without them there would have been little physics, chemistry and biology....guess I am getting too philisophcal here.
The problem is currently folks are having problems, and that too not always, in projecting the future Fib targets and turns but when you look in the retrospect the Fibs behavior can be well understood and explained. I myself do not use Fibs but am waiting for something real substaintial that would make trading much more confident. of course, almost anything like that can be fitted backwards looking. but what exactly is 'fibs behavior'? Infact, most of the successful traders that I have come across or heard about are heavy into Elliot Waves and Fibs. Although I do not find Robert Precther the EW Guru to be very accurate and relaible. really? I have only met one guy heavily into it, he was wrong all the time like Prechter. The only large sample of sucessful traders I have any reference to are the ones in the market wizards book, I don't recall any of them using it. The turtles flat out call it crap on their web site not that I am a turtle. How about people in these forums- ever been a poll? Numbers are very very important, without them there would have been little physics, chemistry and biology....guess I am getting too philisophcal here huh? you are not saying anything really, but what we do understand about math is that fibo is really not that special in regard to the natural world, it was used well to describe rabbit populations but that's about it.
Yea, whatever. I only use them to make money. You just keep on verbalising. Whatever why exactly are you verbalising then? you sure have not added anything useful. I stated my question and motive clearly enough, if you have anything substantial to add then go ahead, if not then kindly butt out. btw, did I ever say that i gave a damn whether you made money or not?