Ok, so then the TA discussion is settled then? You said TA could not work, he proved that it can. What else is there? Remember, one can always "move the goalposts" as to what is the proper amount of "proof". This is one of the biggest turnoffs about dealing with the anti TA brigade...they complain about no proof, someone gives proof, they proclaim it's not enough, then they bait traders to prove themselves in a combine, one does and the brigade still uses phrases like "but time will tell" as to somehow suggest that this, too, isn't enough time. How can one win? Corn gave 50+ trades, and this still isn't enough?
My initial reaction is that the success is despite of TA, in other words, money management played a huge role, rather than due to TA providing better than 50/50 odds on any one entry or series of entrys. surf
So what you are basically admitting right here and now is that it doesn't MATTER what one says or shows with their method in a combine or elsewhere, your initial reaction is purely biased to money management and that the success is "despite of TA". Ok, gotcha. See, "proof" of success was never what you really wanted. You'd prefer to hold strong to your narrow views over anything else. Thanks for your honesty.
Yes, its is. The lower channel line needs to be violated by a full 5 minutes prior to entry trigger-- this has not happened yet, but it was very close. surf
I'm not following you. Did you post a chart of this? And what's with the "channel"? I thought you don't use TA. Or is using a channel not TA in your book?
I don't use charts, but I pulled one up just for the TA crew-- if price breaks 609 for a full 5 minutes, shorts are triggered-- this is the PD channel system----- clearly its not TA past price isnt used in anyway-- PD picks the stock based on potential volatility, and the channel simply attempt to nail the correct direction when it happens----
Charts are deceiving-- per my feed, price did not spend a full 5 minutes below the 609 level. see the chart of the price posted above--- surf