I relate this discussion to ones I have with my 6 year old. He hates onions and peppers. You just mention them and he freaks out but you put onion rings in front of him and they disappear. You put olives and pickled red peppers in front of him and they disappear. I would never tell him there are onions or peppers in either of those things. My point is that, I agree that most TA is inconsistent and therefore worthless for steady profitability but that doesn't mean all TA is worthless. "- TA is generally lagging, so signals come too late. TA people basically rehearse, while pro's anticipate price action." TA doesn't lag, indicators do and that is why one should not TRADE based on the indicators. They should TRADE based on the price action and then allow the indicator to verify the direction of their trade. This is a major misconception and flaw of those using or misusing TA. Consistent traders don't "Guess" or "Anticipate" price action they read it and act on the information price gives them at any given moment. "- TA is based on past behaviour, and the past has nothing to do with the future" I absolutely agree that TA is based on past behaviour but I will clarify that statement by saying it is based on "SPECIFIC & EXACTLY DEFINED" past price behavior. One past poster said, 'history repeats itself". I say, specific and exactly defined price movement history repeats in the same specific and defined direction". The distance it will move in that direction is unknown but that is where learning to read price or "read the tape" gives one an advantage. - TA is generally calculated singularly from price or volume. But volume can at times almost completely negate price, and vice versa. There is yet no good TA to do do a proper mechanical calculation of the P/V relationship. Therefore TA, generally solely calculated from price, is at least heavily misleading at times. "SPECIFIC & EXACTLY DEFINED" TA is based on a marriage of Price & Volume and constant Volume Bar Charts are the ONLY way to read that accurately. Constant Volume Bar Charts have solved the consistency problem with price and volume. The snag is that there are only a few software programs out there that accurately display this consistency; Ensign Software, Q-Charts and MultiCharts are the only ones I am familiar with. Other software companies offer Volume Bars (Tradestation & eSignal) but not the ability to make them "constant". They allow the bars to be a variable which destroys the accuracy of them. In addition, anything that has to be calculated is too time consuming, at least to be used for intraday trading) and too inconsistent because price movement is random not something that can be calculated for its direction and distance. "- TA inclines to give the observer a directional bias, and nothing is worse in trading than having a bias" Yes, TA gives an individual directional bias which in most cases isn't consistent because most TA isn't consistent. But, if one applies "SPECIFIC & EXACTLY DEFINED" parameters to the process then the directional bias is founded on "SPECIFIC & EXACTLY DEFINED" Rules making the bias hundreds of times more accurate. "Bias based on inconsistency, at best, will be inconsistent. Bias based on consistency, at best will be more consistent." "- TA 'bolognaise' obstructs the clear reading of charts, and particularly chart patterns." I have no clue what you mean by "bolognaise". Neither I nor Webster's found a definition for that one, sorry. "- Price levels, S&R's, basic trend rules (higher lows, lower highs etc) are more important than TA. Why not focus your attention on them instead?" I agree!! Price levels, Support & Resistance and basic trends can only be read, "consistently", though if the rules that define them are consistent. Personally, that is all I focus on but I don't get those fixed and real points in the market based on calculations I get them from "SEEING & READING" them as they are created in the Market in realtime. "- "Locals", pit traders, don't use TA, they just use chart patterns and volume. Most people who started in the pit never changed this, even after they went screen-based." Really? I would, as well as a lot of the pit traders and locals I've spoken to, consider what they do "Analysis" of "Price Movement" which is technical not fundamental. Tape reading is TA. BTS (Before the Screen) Pit traders had to "SEE" price movement in their heads and had to keep track of those established tops and bottoms mentally. They had to "SEE" how volume interacted with price at those fixed and real points in the Market that were created by price and their learned behavior was how to react at those points in the Market based on past tops and bottoms and the volume associated with them. Those individuals might use "chart patterns" now but BTS there was no such thing unless they were created in one's head. Chart patterns are inconsistent because they do not take into consideration a specifically defined trend. Why, because for the majority of traders, they do not know how to "specifically define a trend based on a specific time frame or chart increment". I absolutely agree with your assessment of TA from a standpoint of what you are familiar with but you are not familiar with all aspects of TA. You admittedly are bias, ". . . and nothing is worse in trading than having a bias", against TA so your vision is skewed toward looking objectively at anything related to TA. Like my son, open your mind and take a bite . . . you might be surprised.