You appear to be privy to secret, inside information-- perhaps from the trillateral commission or the illuminati? Would you kindly share the source of such fascinating insight. Thank you, surfer
If you're going to set up a straw man, don't be surprised if respondents don't behave as expected. Price action IS technical analysis. If you want to advance the proposition that technical indicators "don't work", that's something else entirely. LC
My definition was in the OP. As the starter of a thread, one is allowed to frame the discussion. Others are allowed to say whatever they want. But putting price action back into TA when the OP excluded it does not mean the OP has to agree that this was the topic of discussion, which obviously it was not.
This thread is 96 pages long and I doubt anyone memorized it. If there is something you are pointing to in particular, please at least give a page#
Yes, you can define it however you like. You can define it as book value. And, no, you do not have to agree that TA correctly defined was the topic of discussion. However, if your definition of TA is completely inaccurate, don't be shocked if those who participate in the thread decide to pick up the ball and play in another field, particularly if the other field defines the rules correctly. LC
By the numbers. True you did not make it vis a vis making money in any way that comes close to what TA represents, scientifically, the market is offering. In contrast, many others have. The market's offerings are the standard. specifically, surf reported out in this thread what it is like to see the results of SCT trading by a practitioneruing price and volume TA. Published quality research is a key for understanding what the market offers. Once what the market offers is known to an investigator and his team, then there is a null hypothesis possibility. Presume for a moment that you can do these two things. Then you would embark on testing the null hypothesis. At some point you and your team would have the results. Skipping forward, let us read your conclusions. Now we know the market offers and the offering is qualified in scientific terms. There is a long bibiolography as well. If you ever became armed with these results you would then embark on upon the process of doing the pragmatic work to set up and operate an organization that could realize what the market offers. Your original assertion is something that no one will every disprove. There is a reason. It has been pointed out to you repeatedly, in fact. If you were a principal and had a team to work on a project, you could pass the OP around and the team would explain to you why your assertion is something that no one will ever disprove. Thank goodness it doesn't matter at all in any way. Much disciplined research is needed to deal with many major subjects that, at this point, are unresolved properly. These last months and the months ahead will sharpen those who are bearing the consequences of past poorly done research. Then, they will apply capital properly to get more research done. You didn't do yours either. I have done mine for many many years. I have done reaearch in many fields it turns out. more importantly, I have applied research appropriately and instituionalized the results in many fields. I conclude that TA works and I have the pragmatic results, as well, that proves that it works. I am not giving you anything and you have nothing to offer anyone. You and thunderdog and surf, et al will be sitting together on the same perch as the people whose work you have based your beliefs upon. Think of all those people who start all those threads with my name in them. The one person who started the journals is the person who got through to surf in order that surf get it that what the journal coordinator is doing is an example of using TA in everysense of TA to scietifically make what the market offers. Week after week, others start derogatory threads to satisfy their needs. These people have a common set of characteristics which are the consequence of the intellectual and experiential lives they are leading. Too bad for them. What is required to make money in markets is following a scientific and rigorous path to get to be able to extract what the market offers. For me the research is in and it took many years. Of the first 25 years I spent, most of it was iteratively refing things. After that it was simply applying the technology as it became available to pragmatically operate the paradigm. At nearly 75, I am able to participate with any informed trader that I meet. Informed trader is a standard term in the financial industry. Informed traders can recognize one another, FYI.