hmm.no edges in the markets

Yes--- without any other inputs other than past price/volume with retail level access and tools its not possible to be consistently profitable with a fixed automated system. The nature of the market makes this impossible. surf

 

"So let it be written; so let it be done."

Surf, perhaps you can do mankind a favor and list all of the things that are impossible, that way we can focus only on the Surf approved list of all things possible.

 

I take it you and James Randi are still searching for proof, then?

Here I am , hoping someone will step forward and prove you wrong, but no luck yet.

Good luck in your continued search for an at-home supertrader.

 

One easy proof is to trade a top performing technical system such as Aberration ( which I believe is the number one backtested performing technical system of all time). For some reason, once you start to trade the signals it stops working. Yeah, I'm a fan of Randi and read skeptical inquirer. Those guys are a little too hardcore for me, but their premise is sound. surf

 

No brother, you have me wrong. This is just my opinion based on my knowledge and experience. However, if you can actually do it, and only YOU really know the truth--- then by all means, keep doing it. But, if all you have as evidence is claims made on this board and by other gurus, yet you struggle -- then consider what I say that you are on the wrong track. peace, surf

 

Unless my memory is failing me, I have to say you have always been polite and civil in your responses, so thank you for that.

But, if you have no knowledge of or experience with a " consistently profitable, fixed automated system." how can you say it is not possible.

I understand having knowledge and experience about a subject, which can be quite extensive and based off of that wisdom making educated projections based on what "you think" is possible.

I started riding dirt bikes when I was 10 years old, I was never incredible on them but was very familiar, if you would have told me at some point in time a rider could do a 720 (two complete revolutions in the air) I would have said " based on my knowledge and experience" that is impossible.

Maybe the above is a lame comparison, but come on, to say something cannot be done because I can't envision it, well that is even more lame.

 

The market is just a sum of all participants - some smarter, luckier, more talented than others. Just saying "the nature of the market" does not explain anything.

 

Surf's recent claim of something "impossible" was nullified by the "nature of the market":

“Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done.” - Robert A. Heinlein

“The person who says it cannot be done, should not interrupt the person who is doing it.” - Unknown

 

It is well known that "proving a negative" is not possible.

MS thinks he has done that.

In doing so, he forfeits quite bit of potential knowledge and acquiring some serious skills.

How did he fall into this trap? Well, we all know by now.

And thanks bighog for yor piece on how deductive thinking begins.

You then find the pieces and put the piecees together.

I would say the most of you have seen the many ways to display data on charts. you only need one to be able to see the kind of mathematics that is required to do analysis that gives you a leading indicator of price.

My account trades price vlalues but I certainly do not use this dependent variable to detemine when the take the full offer of the market.

Why don't people take the full offer of the market and instead just use non market variables? MS has answered that Q and we all "get it".

 

I am sorry to intrude on such an elevated discussion, but it seems to me, that Mr. Market surfer lumps quite a lot into his less than affirmative views if TA. If he would look at PA separately, he may gain some insight.. FWIW.