You know you "can't argue with idiots". They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. I wouldn't care to argue against "holy grail conventional wisdom". No win in that. I can't even convince you, so how could I convince a big profile person like him? You don't need to "take anybody's word for it". (You should take mine because, well, I'm me. ) But you could do your own study. It would be a tedious chore, but you've have to keep a log of the results from "all the trades I took where I considered volume" and compared that to those same chart setups where you ignored volume. That's a lot of work. Few would do it.
There’s a ton of published research on this. Just do a google search “price volume relationship study”. Avoid investopedia and any gimmicky site and read published papers (the intro and conclusions at the very least!). here’s a good primer (but it’s old so I’d read something more recent to enhance):http://ssg.mit.edu/~waltsun/docs/AreaExamTR2638.pdf
Have you been reading any of what I wrote, lol? After a mere half dozen instances, the Volume aspect of Creek, Jump, Backup went out the window. Generally it takes a Dozen rejects to put a prospective method out the running. It takes 100 instances of stats to get in the toolbox. Yeah, I remain unconvinced on specifically how Volume can be demonstrated to work on an intraday timeframe. A Chart Marked-up with evidence of operational accuracy at providing Setups and Entry Triggers has not as yet passed before my peepers. But I remain ever open to the possibility. Meanwhile... we wait for the Marked-up Charts to appear amid textual testimonials. Occular proof would pave the way toward clinching the case. Meanwhile...
I understand the difficulty in accepting something by taking someone else's word abut it. But you should be able to "clinch the case" yourself from logic alone. Volume is a lagging indicator. If considering volume, you want to know its size.. but you don't know that until the bar is complete = lagging. In the meantime, price has already moved away. That's the least damaging aspect of volume consideration.
lol I did not say volume was a good signal for intraday. I said price and volume appear cointegrated — which means that they generally move together. A general relationship implies a weak signal and not something to trade on. If anything, buying in anticipation of rising volume might be better than the opposite (buying when volume is already higher). Skim the paper and thank me later.
the pdf contains More Text and Handwaving. We got plenty of that already. Show us on Your Very Own Marked-Up Charts How Volume Works on Intraday Charts For You? Perty Pleeze?
O'Brien's a reasonable person. He ain't gonna argue. He'll listen and discuss his method, but he'll respect your views as well. The viewers will benefit greatly from your perspective, Scat. Keep in mind that on a Daily Chart, you can sip your beverage and smoke your stogie and take sweet ass time to decide. Intraday, lol, not so much. I look forward to ANY marked-up chart showing Intraday trading using Volume. I Want To Believe. C'mon Scat, Give OB1 a call after he runs through a chart using volume, which is alla-time. I'm already standing in line... Here's a "hang and watch for..." call on EXAS. Scat, call his ass up!
There will be plenty of that... on examples where it appears to correlate. (When price/volume don't appear to correlate, no mention of it.) Even then, the "signal to act" is delayed until the completion of the bar = lagging. On daily bars, the "slippage" could be several percent.
When considering a method the default setting is NO. What leads you to hold the view that I have budged from this default No on the topic of Volume for Intraday Trading, Scat?