Totally wrong and bordering on ignorance. Show me the horrendous disproven--- since if you can, why can't you corner the market? ra ra ra
Truth is, TA is relegated to the marketing departments in institutions, not trading. they have cause the clients like it and to illusitrate points to the clients--- no other reason, Actually its very simple--- charts are illusitrative not predictive. they are used to illusitrate concepts not make predictions about the future. traders only use charts to analyse not to make buy sell decisions.
If you look at a chart, any chart, and make a trading decision, you've used TA. Maybe it's not 'traditional' TA but analysis was used nonetheless. And it wasn't fundamental.
Basically you're saying that "chart analysis" doesn't equate to "technical analysis". Thus, when someone saids they don't use TA but use charts for analysis or illustration purposes...you want me to believe that a chartist is not using the information to help with making trade decisions. That's an interesting opinion you have and it's similar to what I've stated a few times recently...I've met a lot of TA bashers that use charts to monitor their trade positions or to give a visual representation of their trade decision. Therefore, if a chartist believes their trade decisions has nothing to do with what they see on their charts. If that's true, they should be able to make the same trade decisions without looking at a single chart to convince someone they are not using TA. In contrast, the thread starter (crgarcia) implies a chartist and TA person are the same via referencing the words of an author that believes the same. Mark
Cannon fodder was a perfect choice of terms. I recently went to an economics conference with a friend and sat in the back of the room with my computer watching the markets. A gentleman from a rather prestigious university wondered by and was watching me for a few minutes and asked about my charts. I gave him a brief description of what I do and he laughed and basically told me exactly what you just said. I then bet him a cup of coffee that I could tell him exactly what oscillations would occur and at what approximate levels on my chart in advance. I would tell him in advance where price would go up then down then back up . . . in the future. Not the prices at those oscillations but where resistance and support would take place on my chart. He took the bet and came by at 2 pm Arizona time as the market was closing. He looked at my charts and what price had done and where the oscillations had been created. Needless to say I enjoyed a wonderful triple venti vanilla skinny latte and an hour of grilling conversation from an interesting and bewildered Ivy league professor. Seeing is believing. The right chart environment can be predictive if constructed correctly. A closed mind is a terrible thing to waste. I know . . . I'm crazy, there is no way on earth it is possible and you wouldn't waste your precious time validating such a ridiculous notion . . . Cannon fodder . . . I love that.
MOST hedge funds lose money. Usually all the small funds, managing about $5-$10M blowup in less than 5 years. So true. 99%+ use TA 99%+ lose money Too much correlation to be coincidence.
Hey, nice to see you back again . . . and again . . . and again . . . and again . . . and again . . . and again . . . and again . . . Davey Boy. As I stated . . . I'm crazy, there is no way on earth it is possible and you wouldn't waste your precious time validating such a ridiculous notion . . . unless you have a large chunk of money you would like to part with to validate it. WOOhoo
As always this statement scared the $hit out of you: "unless you have a large chunk of money you would like to part with to validate it." If TA is HOG WASH it should be "easy pickins" to fleece me out of my money proving that my stuff is crap. But you always tuck your tail and run when confronted. You try to talk a good game but, as usual, you back it up with the your typical verbal diarrhea.