If you would look back, you would find that the study I posted found no value in S/R levels. You can defend it, but all you will be using is anecdotal evidence. In the word of science and statistics, that is irrelevant. It is a belief, regardless of how many believe it.
I don't see anything useful here. Publications are done via a thorough process. A lot more dependably than forum vents and beliefs.
The hyperbole is that you have a belief in something that you claim must be true, but you offer no evidence. Serious studies show the nonvalue, and you hold them up as flat earthers? You have it quite backwards. Flat earthers believe, and science/math/statistics are based on testing and evidence.
the waves have settled at the surfshack, and we are LONG the DJIA presently going into friday. due to a special request, i shall address the points put forth in the above missive. in addition to a very clear bias against any type of academic, it contains the logical error of assuming that adding more varibles to a solution will result in clearer/better results--kinda the baffle them with BS approach to defending TA. This part doesnt work, but when mixed with this, it does work, type of thinking. It also harbors secret type undertones--- "one needs to know the secret on how to stir the vat" etc. Im sorry but i fail to understand your point other than more complex TA with the right "chef" works?? surf
You yourself said in this thread and else where at ET that TA combined with other things that's TA related may have value (review your commentary about intermarket analysis). Also, where does it say its complex. What's complex to me may be simple to you and what's complex to you may be simple to me that's often determine by market experience (there's those two words again). The only thing complex may be trying to find the right data vendor that offers different types of key markets as a package deal at a reasonable price. My point, just because someone doesn't want to use that junk that you guys keep testing or that every body knows doesn't work as a simple code out of the box... Does not imply that other forms of TA is complex. In fact, I truly believe other forms of TA is much easier to interpret than that stuff you guys are running around pointing an angry finger at along with seeming confused why profitable traders aren't showing proof it works. Have you thought that its possible profitable traders don't use that canned junk and that they use another form of TA. Of course you have thought about it and that's why you guys excluded them from this discussion. Heck, I still can't figure out what some of those indicators mean (sarcasm). Mark
Surf and canfield are just can't do wankers stirring the pot Mark. Ignore them or just check in for a laugh from time to time. Funny as ... I just wish they were putting some money down to grease the markets' wheels.
Actually, some of the stuff they said I do agree with. However, the theme of the thread that's created via the generalistic statement is problematic (inaccurate) when in reality their opinions and facts deals with stuff profitable traders aren't using. Yet, I do enjoy seeing them contradict themselves on a few occasions which is common for someone view the market from inside of a box. I'm still having fun with the exclusion tactics and LUCKY statements in an effort to support their research. Regardless, another profitable day via TA and not via the stuff they have a problem with. Mark