From a mathematical [game theory] point of view, what I said is accurate. "We" are not the market. In fact, it is strange. The market are those that have not made a decision to enter or exit the market, yet. Those that are in the market already (have a position) are in a strange past tense as far as the market is concerned. The market is trying to entice new entrants in, while at the same time trying to make as many current positions as possible unprofitable. It is truly a wonder how it does both of those things at once. If you break down the market participants using a "food chain" analogy, it may be possible to understand how it does those two things in concert better... nitro
And you're supposed to be an "ivy leaguer?" Let me type slowly so you can understand... discontinuous functions are NOT differentiable, therefore you can't calculate a slope at a single point like you can with a parabola. So you need AT LEAST one past price, along with a current price, to say that prices are rising. Or on a fifth grade level, rising market = positive CHANGE in price OVER TIME.
Bearbelly, Even then, like any system that you also follow in the same "let the market give me what it will today" attitude is still based on a prediction. The prediction is based on the testing of Jack's system and it is "if I follow this system today, tomorrow and next week then I will make money?" Similar to a Buddhist predicting that by following the 8 fold path they will move towards nibbana. They don't predict it; they just follow the path with as little attachment to the results as possible. But under it all there is a prediction. Predicting is thus unavoidable.
I will re-state my first post: We are dealing with the duality of trading. Yes prediction is done. BUT it is done during the testing/researching/grail search phase. A person comes up with some rules that he believes to be true about certain conditions. He says, If I see abc, then xyz happens. Yes, this is prediction. Looking for cause and effect. Or effect and trying to find cause. NOW WHEN THE PERSON MOVES INTO THE REALM OF TRADER PREDICTION IS OVER. He becomes a signal taker. He goes long for no other reason than abc exist. The out come of abc is unknown and not knowable. And no longer the point. He takes signals because to not take them would be to call himself a liar. He excepts the uncertainty of any individual trade. But he believes in his success because he has structured the probabilities in his favor. ALL PREDICTION WAS DONE PRIOR TO BECOMING A TRADER. Now there is a higher level of trader who does looks at reality and not a system. He sees the rain drops and thus grabs an umbrella. Most of us are at the stage where we see the rain clouds and grab an umbrella. But as stated, we do not grab the umbrella because we predict rain. We grab the umbrella because or method of weather understanding has told us to grab the umbrella. (the duality) This higher state of trading, trades in the moment. Price is rising , then go long. Price is falling, be short. The future will take care of itself, and the market will take care of the trader. This type of trader doesn't want what he wants, he wants what the market wants. And what does the market want? To keep on doing what it is already doing. But he does not know what the future holds, so he places his focus on what IS real-what is actually happening now. So while some take the umbrella out at the first sign of a grey cloud, the master level trader takes the umbrella out when he gets wet. He has less baggage to carry and his path is smoother. The others are carrying umbrellas and raincoats, only too find out that the early clouds dissipate and the sun shines brightly.
So the "duality of trading" is that the guy "in the realm of trader" isn't predicting / anticipating / forecasting / concluding / betting / speculating / wagering / expecting that xyx will follow abc as it did in the research phase? P.S. For anyone claiming to only focus on what "IS" LOL, why do you use bar charts with PAST prices and indicators & studies that also rely on PAST data?
This is kind of fun. Pretty interesting exchange of ideas for a change. Let me try another analogy. How about an electronic game. Say your charting software and other tools are DOOM with the exception that each game is different so you dont know what is going to happen next just because you have played it before. In this situation you cannot predict, all you can do is react. To me, its exactly the same with monitoring the market. I just react to what I see unfolding. Theres a saying thats been around for awhile something to the effect of trade what you see not what you think. When youre playing sports, chess, or whatever, you make the best move available to you at the time. I dont see how this is predicting.
Ok. I get the doom analogy and could play with it but there may be a better away. I also get the just reacting as part of how one plays the game (similar to tennis, one ball at a time) but I'm trying to get at the implied prediction despite our psychological devices. Simple question. If you didn't expect (passive prediction) that you would make money over time by following method X (*) would you do so? (*) (or at least get equivalent benefits of some form (thrills & satisfaction in doom))
When you point your BFG at a monster in DOOM and pull the trigger, are you not predicting that you will hit the monster and attempt to do damage to it? Why would you pull the trigger if you didnt think it would hit, do damage, or have some benefit to you? We predict all the time.
In chess you make moves because you are predicting what your opponent is going to do, and what the board will look like in the future. Chess is especially about predicting. I played at an expert level years ago.
Ah. Ok. I see where youre coming from. You could take that one step further and say that in order to do anything today that I dont feel like doing I must predict that I will be here tommorrow to benefit. I will agree to that.