This simply is a form of the Holy Grail we seek! http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21167&highlight=douglas
To me this nonsensical talk about the Holy Grail of trading implies a mythical system that never loses. People who are only willing to trade or believe that you can only make money in the stock market by being right all the time should take a rain check out of this profession right away. The best traders embrace the concept of "PROBABILITY" and know over a long series of independent events/trades that they will have accumulated a larger amount of money to show for their statistical edge. The best traders know how to take losses and not fear it or ever regret it. Holy Grail...keep looking because a statical edge is not enough for these people, because those who seek the Holy Grail seek something much more, that does not exist.
Thanks for your sharing, CM. Consistency and high probabilbity would be more than enough to me (never expecting never any loses!)!
Friedman!! Hayek!!! Buckley? Thanks. Have added it to favorites and will definitely need a little time; but I'll wade through it all eventually. Terrific site! Sorry I don't have an equivalent reciprocal offering just now, but if I find one I'll notify you.
According to Douglas (Trading in the zone), Q "You have two choices: You can try to eliminate risk by learning about as many market variables as possible. (I call this the black hole of analysis, because it is the path of ultimate frustration.) Or you can learn how to redefine your trading activities in such a way that you truly accept the risk, and you're no longer afraid." UQ
Holy Grail ? it depends on the definition: Holy Grail means impossible and according to CFTC it's impossible to have any statistical edge with TA and so any one who affirms that would be considered as having found the Holy Grail http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=379217&highlight=holy+grail#post379217 "Technical analysts . . . first make a deterministic (one might say spiritual) leap of faith that non-random price patterns exist. They then illogically posit that these patterns, once revealed to the few (or indeed -- through marketing -- to the many), may be successfully exploited in trading. To accomplish this, of course, the 'pattern' must remain undetected by others (otherwise the increased market activity defeats the 'pattern' by driving the price to a point where speculation is no longer profitable). See Marshall (1989) at 263-264. Public policy presumes that markets are not so witless. 'The presumption is [] supported by common sense and probability [as] recent empirical studies have tended to confirm Congress' premise that the market price of shares traded on well-developed markets reflects all publicly available information . . . ' Basic, 485 U.S. at 246." (note 75, page 41)" "[A]ny marketer's claim of increased profitability or reduced risk through the use of these systems is likely to be fraudulent". (note 75, page 41)
It's most interesting (especially when mentioning statistical speaking) to note a few keywords above including "impossible", "virtually", "most" and "likely"!