Now you are being deliberately contrarian to the point of stupidity. People buy insurance because they are betting misfortune will befall them? Did your mother drop you on your head when you were a baby?
The subject of the thread is my "teachings", i.e., Wyckoff and the SLA/AMT that I wrote. It is not about AMT in general. If you want to believe that AMT does not explain every movement of price in the market, you are entitled to that belief. But your beliefs are not pertinent to the thread. As to being presented with a chart, I don't recall the situation. I'd be happy to review it.
The subject of this thread is has anyone used your teachings to become a successful trader. It is not about whether SLA-AMT works or not. Since you have a deficit of successful acolytes, you have shifted the focus of discussion. Do not for a moment think that folks here on ET are so stupid that you can get away with that. I would hope that the person who posted that chart and questions is following this and will respond. If not, I will look for it and refresh your memory. Just think about "if you had done the work you would know the answer", perhaps that will save me time better spent otherwise.
And the answer to that question was "yes". We've moved on from that. As to the chart, I look forward to seeing it.
We have? I distinctly recall the OP reiterating the question as there were no demonstrably successful acolytes. As to your question about why else buy insurance, people do so to protect themselves from the effects of misfortune. Nobody buys insurance, health, fire, accident, whatever, because they are betting misfortune will befall them. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, because to think that people are betting that misfortune will befall them is so stupid it beggars belief. I began this with no ill will whatsoever. Indeed, I was basically sympathetic given the pest that Surf is. But you have let hubris and ego, your need to appear perfect before your acolytes, sway your logic to the point of stupidity. Take a step back and think about it.
I believe you when you say you began with no ill will, and I mean none either. I think you had a legitimate question, but I believe you should take the step back. DB is explaining the market at its simplest most basic form when speaking of AMT. You not liking the fact that your stops get run doesn't change the fact that buyers and sellers agreed on a price. Your stop was placed for a reason. Beyond the value of your stop you placed, was a price you were know longer willing to buy/sell at. The fact that it was "run" just means that someone else called you on it. They bought/sold just before you no longer found value worth pursuing or holding onto. You're still thinking in terms of placing stops, winning, losing, etc rather than viewing the market as an actual market.
As you have been polite, I will reciprocate. All who blindly think that AMT explains everything that happens in the market are oblivious to the fact that the market is gamed quite frequently. Beyond momentary irritation at a stop being taken out, I feel nothing because I am very conservative with risk. When I was trying to day trade ES, unsuccessfully I must say, I used $15,000 of capital per contract. I went back to swing trading off daily charts, which is where I belong. What I really struggle to understand is why you would think that every transaction that takes place in the market is on the basis of willing buyer willing seller. There are so many examples of the market being driven in a direction a big player wanted, or just dirty corrupt fixing, like the forex fix, or pump and dump with stocks. As for DB explaining the market in its simplest form, please do not confuse simple with simplistic. He is being deliberately evasive on the points I am making because he has no valid retort, but wants to continue arguing because he can't accept that. In the long term, AMT undoubtedly works. If you trade intraday, do not fool yourself that AMT determines price.