Maestro has intellectually wasted you and your fellow TA fundamentalists. Time to run back to your sandbox and abacus. surf
So if I distill this downâ¦. Manage your trades, Manage yourself Novel idea 5yo retard â hmmm I resemble that remark RN
Yes Sir... along with a little common sense Many ways to make money trading (though admittedly I gravitate toward TA - for trading) RN
Get off your high horse and put your ego in your pocket. Most successful short term trader use some type of T/A. The real successful ones use original T/A that is not published. They created there own T/A based on strats that they created with exits already predefined. The reason why there are indicators is because before these indicators became public somebody was trading them successfully. Of course when they become public the results drastically change. This does not mean that you cannot trade an indicator it means that you have to test different R/R s and add variables such as other indicators to give you the signals for an edge. usually the less greedy you are the better one may work. As long as you can trade with a reasonable risk. All this T/A naysaying is a joke. The reason: T/A only has potential just like any entry. Whether it's trading news, fundamentals or what ever people choose to trade on. A real successful trader can trade successfully on all of these types of entries. Why because the worst traders and the best traders can enter the exact same trade. One comes out with profits a majority of the time. The other gets a margin call. One trader knew what the set up was worth. The other just entered blindly and didn't have any idea what the heck was going to happen or maybe had a plan just not a good one. As I had mentioned It's the exit strategy that makes the difference. Also lets take decent support and resistance levels. They may only actually work 50% of the time. Any decent trader that chooses to trade support and resistance knows that the reward of a Support trade that works is much greater then the initial risk. With support or resistance you can set a tight stop just below your entry and reap several times your initial risk. So even with a 40% win ratio you can still turn a profit. I think what's really going on is you chose to right an article saying that T/A doesn't work. You caused an uproar with traders like myself that prove your article wrong on a daily basis. And now your stuck with your foot in your mouth and your best defense is offence. I personally can right an article as well with more detail that elaborates on why T/A works for some and not for all. One that actually includes the most important aspect in trading. The exit. Super
I have tested many combinations of random entries with various trade management. Somehow results are not any close to TA patterns proven to work. So there's still difference.
NO smurf, he has not. Time to run back to your journal, where you can use the complain button anytime someone points out your nonsense and inconsistencies.
You just don't see it because you are blinded by the religion of TA. Maestro's points literally destroy the notion of what you call TA. surf
Whoa, that's a mouthful--- What TA patterns are "proven to work"? this is a non sequeutar anyway-- as TA patterns ONLY EXIST IN THE PAST therefore, the ALL have worked otherwise they wouldn't and couldn't exist. Can you explain the exact tests you conducted and the results. What was the data set? Can these "tests" be replicated? No offense meant, just trying to correct faulty beliefs.
I believe someone gave you a direct link to an article about the merits of TA. You replied that you and those you work with would review the academic article. Did you not read it like so many other links folks have posted to academic studies in the past as a rebuttal to your own posting of links to academic articles against TA. Did you not notice that if there are academic articles involving different trade signals, different trade management, different trading instruments, different historical data and many other different variables that say it works or does not works...is it possible that TA merits depends greatly upon how it works with other variables in one's trading plan. You yourself stated specifically that T. Sykes uses TA usefully because he also uses real information with the TA. My point, the issue really isn't how much TA someone uses nor is it what type of TA someone uses. The issue is does the TA work with whatever trading plan someone is using the TA within even if there's something in that trading plan that may or may not be more important than TA...only profitable traders can answer that whereas losing traders will continue debating the merits of TA. Note: I've already establish that cornix does have a habit of implying he uses TA and nothing else when in fact he does uses other things with his TA. Please try to remember such when you reply to him. By the way, cornix stated a few replies ago to me that he was using something call PD as in price drivers...maybe with sarcasm. ***** Can you explain exact tests you conducted and the results. What was the data set that he may have used for them PD because cornix did not go into any further details ***** If you can not or don't want to...why expect him to do the same ? P.S. You can not win this debate...never will. Why? You continue vouching for T. Sykes as a profitable trader (e.g. you showed his broker statements) while trying to minimize the fact the guy uses TA within his trading plan as shown in his own Youtube videos. Just as importantly, you have stated yourself uses TA for visualization purposes only...why use it if it has no merits ? You stated that the TA you use is not TA even though those you commonly debate are using the exact same TA (e.g. s/r levels). You consistently request others to provide proof of their TA while yourself does not provide proof of your "price drivers". You consistently over the years have ignored academic studies by others about the merits of TA.
The article was deemed not even worthy of comment. I believe TA is useful to design a context from which to make decisions, not as a decision making tool itself. TA is illusitrative not predictive, therefore, if is not predictive, why would random entries have any less of a chance for success than non predictive TA entries? There is a major fatal flaw in the "logic" behind TA. Think about it seriously, you know i make sense> surf