Yeah but retail traders don't establish those lines for the most part. The algo's do. What I have found, more often than not, and certainly not 100% of the time.... but if you're counting cards in a casino, those lines pay off more times than they lose.
Maybe. I don't really care either way just my own personal observation. Fuck I don't even trade I'm just here because I have a side bet going to see if Padu breaks even.
Scat's KISS based on lines drawn on high volume, high volatility trading instruments is right more than it's wrong. Yeah it's simple, but it is true. It really is. Sometimes it's almost so easy, you want to play contrary. (It can't be this easy to make money, I have to go opposite) Going back to the card counting analogy, playing that contrary hand fails more often than it wins. Seems like it shouldn't, but it does. Most of the time.
Way back when I was studying pro trend followers, the ones who reoptimized periodically had much smoother equity curves than the old dinosaurs stuck on the idea the strat should run on any instrument with no arbitrary parameters (indicators, etc). After 2009 the legacy guys couldn't seem to catch up. Something changed. Many losers were wiped out! The opponents get harder if you survive a few levelz into the tournament.... The flip side is it's threads just like this one (and utube vids) that make some of the old systems work again, as new traders learn new styles and setups. Sometimes I think gurus start losing on purpose to preserve the strat (Bob Prechter comes to mind). But Scat is right, no one is going to do this. It's too hard buying on support. "There's a huge difference between knowing the path and walking the path"
I use very complex indicators. I think the complexity of the indicators I use exceeds the imagination of most people. However, I think that using only moving averages without complex indicators is sufficient for making profits. Even they may be extremely profitable. They are intuitive traders with very good execution.