rcanfiel. What can you prove? What can anyone prove about the markets? Very little. Good luck with your thread, and good day.
surely multiple tests performed over multiple years and time frames resulting in negative or dubious results should tell one something. are there ta picassos who thru intution or other non quantifiable skills able to discern and make it work? probably... however if your not one of these savants.... better look elsewhere for an edge. surf
"The consideration of Price action, free of all indicators or other philosophies mentioned above, is not included in the definition for purposes of this thread" well, ok. but technically speaking, you are just railing against the efficacy of certain kinds of technical analysis ALL studies of price action are technical analysis. and that includes the purest form - just watching the tape. not to get all semantical, but that's what technical analysis is personally (on an intraday time frame) i do not look at a single lagging indicator. i consider price. i use market profile, market breadth, intermarket analysis, key reference areas, tape, etc. to make my decisions ALL of these *are* technical analysis. none of these are lagging indicators. also, every guy who is trading order flow in the pit is relying on TA, just not the conventional retail trader's lagging indicators. every market maker that guns for retail traders stops and tries to fake out retail is also using technical analysis. if you are not relying on fundies (which i use extensively for investing and less so for swing, but obviously not for intraday futures), then it's TA TA is the study of price qua price. but i agree that most traders will lose trying to use squiggly lines to make their trade decisions the first thing i do with new trainees is get them to clear all the stochastic/macd/rsi stuff of their charts and start looking at price, breadth, and what the institutions are doing
Hi again, marketsurfer So if I read you correctly, what you're really saying is that while there may be some value in what Jack Schwager called discretionary trading (based on what David Aronson calls Subjective Technical Analysis (STA)), there is no value in what Schwager called mechanical trading (based on what Aronson calls Objective Technical Analysis (OTA)). In other words, STA can't be scientifically tested, and OTA can't pass the scientific tests, as far as you're concerned. The problem is that you've jumped to a conclusion that isn't supported by the evidence. Aronson tested a large but still limited subset of OTA-based trading systems. It's premature to claim total failure before all of the evidence is in. JMO.
I won't enumerate my degrees. But I agree that it doesn't need many words to describe you - one's enough "for those who exhibit both ignorance and arrogance." Wanker.
Nice post. I use tons of analogies in my teachings so I can relate. I agree as well that criticizing others methods without first hand knowledge of precisely how it works is silly. If it works for one it might not work for another . . . who cares. Again nice post. I can't wait for the season to start as well. I go through withdrawal in the off season.
Careful kiwi. I think rcanfiel has a Pez dispenser loaded with $2 words. If you keep it up he's liable to compose a diatribe against you, too. But try not to take it personally since he doesn't make it a habit of actually reading the posts that he quotes and responds to. (Oops, sorry. Being the master of linguini that he is, rcanfiel will insist that I should have written "...and to which he responds." As an aside, do you think he recognized the grammatical error in the post wherein he boasts about his academic credentials? Actually, I'm sure it was quite intentional and for the general amusement of those of us who regard irony as a form of High Art. He's such a thoughtful lad, our rcanfiel. Aside from being an asshole and a wanker, of course.)