As stated a few times in this thread...profitable traders are not using 100% technical analysis... They are also dependent upon risk management, position size management, psychology et cetera. The guy you're talking about is using position size management in position reversals or re-entry into the opposite direction by doubling the trade size regardless if overall he's profitable in those types of trades. On another note, I'll repeat the issue in this thread. The OP specifically asked for someone to Prove to me that Technical Analysis Works...he then begin to move the goalpost in his opening post by equating it to "super-rich" investors. His exact words in the thread title. Simply, not only do you need to prove that TA works...you need to be super-rich too from the TA. He even gives examples of those that are super-rich so that you know exactly what the bar is that he's looking for and that implies he also wants to see your broker statements, bank account statements, and probably some type of super-rich lifestyle verification along with the fact you'll be able to correlate it all to your use of technical analysis. Yet, some in this thread have shown up to pretend he asked to Verify You're A Profitable Trader and that's not what he's asking because the two requests involve completely different types of verification. Simply, verifying that you're profitable does not verify that you're using technical analysis nor does it eliminate the importance of other edge's in your trade method such as risk management, position size management, psychology... Thus, a breakeven TA method can become great (produce profits) if proper risk management is used, good position size management is used and the trader is good at applying his/her trade method...not sabotaging his trading. It explains why two different traders using the exact same TA method while trading the exact same trading instrument can have completely different trade results...one is profitable and the other is a loser. That's another way of saying this is that it's not all about technical analysis. The real edge is the trader and TA is then just a tool for that trader as much as a hammer and nails is to a construction worker. wrbtrader
Exactly right. I would even add that what separates the highly profitable trader from everyone else isn't so much that they are putting on amazing trades but rather what they do after exiting a losing trade. Good entries that tend to go into profit immediately versus crappy entries that always seem to be badly timed is of course an excellent start. But how you manage that trade once you're in it or after you exit for a loss is what really separates the successful from me losing crowd.
Technically that's not Martingale, but you still could get in a lot of trouble doing that if the market goes into raging whipsaw mode.
I agree with your comments. Going opposite is a bad trade. Doubling position size is another bad action. Even you make more money on the current double size trade, in the future this kind of action will easily blow up your account.
Didn't mean to be a snark as I was just having a little fun with you. thanks for the definition of sanitized. Makes sense.
I would absolutely like to prove to you that TA doesn't work and to not use it, and to everyone reading this thread. And to those that work out some TA that works, don't tell anyone as the algo trading systems fight back against the trading patterns of these systems. Support and resistance worked great years ago but now that is over. I'm on these types of places to make sure what I use isn't common knowledge. But a few of you have touched on it. It doesn't work, don't explore or use it. Thanks.
I have read his Journal which offered nothing valuable to me. Also even he claims his technical make money, none of those who learn those technical could use them to make money. I was reading that in order for his technical to work, one needs to judge things the way he did. But none of those who learn his technical could judge things the way he did. I would suggest him to set up a strategy at C2 if he needs to convince people.
TA - Doesn't work PA - Doesn't work FA - Doesn't work What really works is selling courses and signals.
Buffy is one of a kind, he is a second generation of professional traders, his father was a fund manager. Look into famous people lifes and you will see how 80% of them are following their parents knowledge. They had it solved once they were born. As per if I consider proof that famous traders use TA and become successful, I'd say that such proof is weak, since they don't reveal their entire process. I am sure that TA is a small part of their success and the majority of them make it because of a strong risk management knowledge. TA is just a way to generate signals and those signals can be completely ignored if your position sizing techniques are on point. What makes the trade successful is not the entry, it is the exit.