I am not saying that. All I am saying that if a long position is closed with a profit, the trend must have been up for the timeframe the position has been held. Axeman: I am not doubting your system or trading method or numbers. But to me a winning trade just can not be countertrend ... That's all. Congratulations on your system!
Me: >...to say that just because prices went up, a new >trend has been established, will not get any sort >of common agreement. opw: >I am not saying that. All I am saying that if a >long position is closed with a profit, the trend must >have been up for the timeframe the position has >been held. Well, then you ARE saying that a new trend is established just because prices went up. You are free to define a trend any way you wish for your own purposes, but that is not the way trends are defined using common trading terminology. There are so many examples of how wrong your "trades are only profitable with the trend" position is, but I'll just pick one... Flatlining stock -- 5cent spread -- I play market maker all day and pull profitable trade after profitable trade from the spread. New trend each time I profit from the long or short side? By all common definitions, no. By yours, yes. I'll take "no". JB
Gentlemen: If I may offer my opinion. For the past little while I have been testing the following definition of so called "TREND" Trend is a simple subtraction of the integral of all inside Ask sizes during a period of time from the integral of all inside Bid sizes during the same period of time. (Supply and Demand really). If this subtraction is positive then the trend is UP! Otherwise it is down. Cheers,