I believe the markets are constantly changing. The only way to consistently make money in the financial markets is to be able to look behind price to get one step ahead of it. In other words, look to see what moves price, quantify this, then make an educated and statistically based guess on what will happen next in the market. Information is the only thing that matters in the markets. My system is called Price Drivers--- is it right 100% of the time? no way! But it does tilt the odds in your favor on every trade. Any system based on price alone is doomed to fail. Price is the past, the past does not equal the future in anyway. In addition, I have read Wykoff--- his writing style is just like all the other gurus-- it needs to be interpreted to make sense and to systematize-- market goes up he wins, market goes down he wins--- its very nebulous material but its base belief that price somehow determines future price is logically flawed. This flaw has tricked wannabe traders like DB--- if they are making money, its because of money management. surf
VP, Firstly, thank you for remembering the questions that were asked and not answered. I'm not quoting you because I want to keep this short. I'm having a discussion with the guru. I'm not going to waste my time debating everything I say with his disciples. If he has nothing to say, then let it end. Stop runs was provided as an example of market activity that has nothing to do with finding what the market sees as fair value. So too quote stuffing, spoofing, pump and dump and so on. If we get back to the topic of the thread, we would be looking at whether anyone has used the guru's teachings profitably. Terribly uncomfortable subject for some, but let's not lie to ourselves about it.
Interesting. So, some sources of information other than price are useful to you? I've been dismissive of market depth personally (after hearing whales detail how they can hide their volume at will, etc.) and I can't really think of much else, apart from arbitration but that's not really a retail game. Maybe news, though automated news trading is already quite popular and I'd assume priced into the action. Just curious, did you read his course from the 1930's or some of his earlier material? I wouldn't qualify the bits I've read so far as nebulous; they're somewhat mechanical in fact, about recognizing the tracks left by market manipulators. But isn't trading about probabilities, not certainty? Nothing "equals" or "predicts" the future, but can you statistically disprove that buying a pull-back down to a trend line incurs less downside risk than buying completely at random? If entry selection was entirely meaningless, then truly randomly generated entry times and directions, with the right money management, would yield excellent results, yet I've heard of the thought experiment but of no trader actually relying on such a system. Therefore, while I do think money management is massively important, I have not seen any proper proof that it, alone, explains a chart trader's success. Someone would need to demonstrate a similarly profitable random entry system, which would make headlines. (If it's been done, I'd love to read more about it!) Also, an example which comes to mind, perhaps the simplest and least subjective one. If past price truly wasn't useful in helping to determine its probable subsequent path, then simple geometry like Andrews' median lines wouldn't predict mean reversion roughly 80% of the time, which they do. Given that those have been researched by multiple parties over several decades, I can't dismiss them as a fluke. This is what leads me to think that what works for you (whatever it is) may not be the only non-random way of trading. And I'm not referring to Wyckoff or SLA/AMT here, nor money management, but about price history being in any way meaningful in finding opportunities with better than random probabilities. I haven't seen that DISproved yet, which is why I ask for clarifications when there's a claim such as yours that price is random in relation with itself over time. (Quick note: if DB's been trading for a living for more than a year or two, then he is by definition not a "wannabe", but in fact a practitioner, regardless of the reasons behind his success, which are merely a matter of opinion.)
Phantom, I appreciate your thirst for knowledge. But I need to correct you-- nothing predicts the market 80% of the time-- where do you get this stuff? DB has provided no proof of success other than rhetoric, heck, no one has even come forward to support the premise of this thread. I have told you my truth. You will find the truth if you keep looking, just don't be tricked by the pretenders. Find a proven entity to follow-- Unless you know someone you are 100% sure of--- may I suggest finding a successful prop firm to learn the ropes from--- Im out of here! surf
Neither does auction market theory: "To begin with, in the market, price is often not the same as “value”. In fact, one could say that since the process of “price discovery” is a search for value, they match only by coincidence, and then perhaps for only an instant. Blink and you missed it. Add to this the fact that for all intents and purposes there is no such thing as “value” but rather the perception of value. After all, what is the “value” of, say, Microsoft or GE or that little stock your stylist told you about? This state of affairs may seem like a recipe for chaos, but it is in fact the basis for making a market, that is, reconciling the differences – sometimes extraordinarily wide differences – in perceptions of value." You are trying to debate people about a theory of which you have only the vaguest understanding, using terms of your own definitions which are different from what everyone else in the world understands those terms to mean. What we have here is failure to communicate. And you are the one failing, not everyone else.
You're the one labeling him as such, by the way, and I don't understand why. When I arrived here, I didn't see him as being so much of a "preacher" as you do, but just as someone who cares enough to answer people's questions about his personal methods. "Take it or leave it." I'll assume you mean this generally and not about me specifically. There's a big difference between participating in an interesting discussion and being someone's "disciple". (Which again, I believe confers some kind of religious aspect that simply isn't there.) If you wanted to talk to him exclusively, there's always private messaging. There nobody else will bother you. They're still an integral part of the overall price action though, and by that I mean that tape reading still has its place regardless of what motivates the individual trades printed. Here we go with the schoolyard name calling again... Guru : "In the West some derogatory interpretations of the word have been noted, reflecting certain gurus who have allegedly exploited their followers' naiveté, due to the use of the term in certain new religious movements." - So you're accusing @dbphoenix of exploiting naive traders, correct? If he was active here in order to sell something, I'd be suspicious too, but seriously, why the aggression? I keep searching for the trolls' motivations and I can't quite get the angle. What are you guys warning "the naive" against? That maybe someone, for whom Wyckoff isn't suitable, will waste a few precious irreplaceable hours reading the 400 pages of material and deciding for themselves that it's not for them? I've "wasted" time reading Elder's books, but I'm not about to start "warning off" everyone else who's showing interest in his methods! I assume you also disregard the experience of @fortydraws for some reason? He's even posted some P&L's in his early days to try shutting up some trolls.
What we have here is people only seeing what they want to see and engaging in semantics for the sake of argument. Read slowly what I wrote and you quoted and you should see that I was writing about perception and not absolutes. You've done your job, the master likes what you wrote, run along and simper now there's a good chap.
No, language matters. It is central to what makes human beings different from all other beings - the ability to agree upon terms denoting abstract concepts and to communicate and comprehend one another on the basis of that shared understanding. Now you can scold me as I am indeed done with you. I cannot believe how much time I allow myself to spend arguing with stupid people.