I thought it was called a "trading course". Most traders whom I know say money management and psychology are the two most important parts of trading and thus any self-titled "trading course".
This all sounds good and appears to make sense. However, your post touches upon the crux of the issue You state that TA quantifies and identifies probability. It does neither and by saying this it shows a lack of understanding. Not to mention, arguing that TA does not try to predict is just silly. By entering a directional trade you ARE predicting about the trade or series ( for those who fall back on the series reasoning) so the word games don't work.
I don't think you read what I posted. I don't use TA, but I do use a naked chart. Posting statements is very different from posting trading calls with no stop and target.
Cool, if it works for you, great! I can't argue about that--- My argument is when someone posts a "method" snd make "claims" that is inherently flawed and clearly can not work-- yet they claim consistent multi year success with it. See the "price action chart posters on elite for examples. Some have been driven from elite with their heads hung in shame. Others have even been outed by big mike when they sought asylum under his roof for themselves and their flock. peace, surf
All methods are flawed in some way, be it TA, fundamental, stat, value, trend following, sunspots, whatever. It's like Ed Seykota says, "In the markets, just about everything works sometimes, and hardly anything works all the time."
Lol. Of course it is. You're using, or attempting to use, past price movements to predict future price movements. In it's broadest sense, any methodology using price history, whether that's a long time back or a split second back is TA.