No, liquidity and uninformed traders exist in addition to the noise and informed ones you are referring to.
Enough's enough... your blanket comment on trend following + any and all technical analysis models is the dumbest thing I've heard. You scorn lots of things. To top that, you pretend that nobody makes money doing such and the success stories you hear aren't real. It reminds me of a conversation I had recently with a man who refused to accept that China has skyscrapers and that they're just an illusion of his dirt road reality. I'll give you that one's reality is his. But, you are obviously on some incessant mission to promulgate mediocrity, and it seems that you are one of it's proud leaders. Also, you're waving the "Me" flag. Just so you know, you're not doing things any different from any basic price mean reversion model with a dash of historical time study. You plagiarize TA concepts, repackage into "neo-surf channel" (bye bye gann) and then refer trend as drift. Then you have the gall to trademark such a thing. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.
Markets cannot be purely random - if it were completely random, it would be too easy to win! Think about that one
Exactly . Does anyone on the dailySpeculations list have the balls to call the "upward drift" simply a "Trend". It may lead to a serious loss of perceived identity and much soul searching.
Posters, Let me ask a question. When does a trend become a trend? In another way, at what point do you call a trend a trend? 1 HH HL? 2 HH HL? 20 HH HL? For those of you say there are trends. When do you call a trend a trend? Richard Dennis seemed to have no idea to the answer to this question, and that is why the turtle rules were written the way they were. Best Regards Oddi
And yet you hold LW in high regard? How utterly and unbelievably ironic. Have you called the NFA or gone to a library to verify the validity of Gallacher's claims about LW, as I have? Why is it that you accuse others of religious zeal who avoid the truth, while at the same time you refuse to accept the existence of documented evidence against someone just because you like him? Who's got religion now? And while we're at it, why have you not yet responded to my earlier post in connection with VN? Specifically: How is it that you simply dismiss out of hand relevant questions based on your prior assertions?
This discussion is very difficult and at the same time endless. The only way to define if trends exist and can be used to make profit is by analyzing the statistics of thousands of trades. If you can make 80% or more profitable trades it is clear that you have an edge. If you give back in your losing trades less than 20% of the gross profits it is clear that you have an edge. If you make huge returns it is clear that you have an edge. Now, whether you call this luck, an edge, trendfollowing, scalping or contrarian trading doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is making money. The discussion on definitions and use of words will never give an undisputable answer. Statistical figures on trading, on the contrary, can. Because these results are proven and real. Discussion are theoretical and hypothetical. To me there are trends. Trends are moves that are big enough to make decent money. If someone can catch most of the daily moves (in the right direction!) it is clear that he masters trendfollowing, because in the long run it cannot just be luck.