Your opinion is based on your (very limited) own knowledge and/or experience. Your so called "curve fitting" confirms this. You see coding as curve fitting, which it is not always, and in case of a good strategy it even has nothing to do with curve fitting. I build a strategy with use of Excel and after that it was coded. I never tried to optimize parameters to get the best result, as that is curve fitting. I used it in a completely different way. A way from which you probable don't even know the existence. The basis is logical thinking. The result is that my system is profitable in any kind of market (trending, sideways or anything else) although returns are not always as good. Trending markets are always more profitable than sideways markets. My system tries to detect the kind of "trending" we have and automatically adapts the system to that. I can also use it in futures, crypto's, stocks or forex. This excludes already clearly the curve fitting as all these markets are different. I also use the same system for longer than a decade with good results, again confirming that it is not curve fitted. It is a dynamical system, so self adapting on the results of the calculations. I can even change the parameters within certain limits without any, or at least a very small impact on the long term performance. And this impact can be positive as well as negative because some trades will be more profitable while others can be less profitable. A curve fitted system will never work for a long time, and it needs to be curve fitted over and over again. Curve fitting is never ending as it incorporates data that is noise instead of good and relevant data. It does not filter out the noise.
Exactly we both don't know, but I wasn't the one making a statement as if I did know. As for Gann etc disagree . 1 + 1 = 2 is not code.
I don't say you are right. I just drew the conclusion that following your logic, nobody knows. My personal opinion is that, if I have a conversion with somebody, I can make a fairly good estimation of his trading knowledge. Many on ET are at such a low level that they are easy to find as they tell a lot of nonsense. About Gann you are right. It is however code, but the coding was done for you. So you don't need coding yourself. But for me Gann is not working. Gann uses always the same calculations, so it is a static indicator. And static indicators never perform well in dynamic markets. That's why people start curve fitting. And markets are always dynamic, never static. The moment you try to make Gann dynamic you are coding. That's why I never use any standard indicator that can be found on internet for free.
I had a desire to learn programming, but I realized that it would take me too long. So I decided that I needed to find the best training that they could offer me. I saw a lot of courses, but they cost too much for me to afford the training. I was having a lot of trouble understanding the entire field and was thinking of giving up on the idea. But then I found an article where they told me that I could get paid to learn programming. It interested me and I decided to take this opportunity. It was a good motivation for me.