I second that. Thank you Darkhorse for giving me hope that clear, honest and compelling critical thinking still lives...
Once again, he states the mantra, refuses to address the thinking/logic. My advice to you, surfer, is to study Darkhorses comments word by word on this thread, he's really schooled you. The least you could do is learn from what he has to say.
No, you're not. But so many of us have gone well past the point of being tired of these same old arguments. Those whose lives are centered on message boards continue. As for the rest, I'm sure I speak for at least some of them when I suggest that either "traders" will get it or they won't. And if one has done his best to explain it and the "trader" still doesn't get it, then perhaps it's best to leave it up to someone else to teach the lesson, that someone generally being the market. Or perhaps the "trader's" broker. Or his bank. Or spouse.
Did anybody ever count the number of laws that Jack invoked to make his elephant run? That's watchemecall true redhot TA. Very popular with the crowd!
i acknowledge and respect darkhorse' rhetorical ability. i am indeed honored to have someone of his obvious intellect see fit to challenge my points. however, unfortunately, he is wrong in this regard and exhibiting obvious biases toward his way of viewing the market. the good news is, you are witnessing what makes the market work---if everyone bought new highs, who would sell to them?? happy thanksgiving! surfer
36 pages, 100's of paragraphs on TA, and no live trades to backup the talk. Where is the proof that TA works?
yes, having met dr. lo in person, he is someone who has my respect as a trader, market theorist and professor. did you study his paper mentioned earlier? it was the first attempt to objectively identify TA patterns so that they could be quantatively tested. think about it, prior to 2000, no one has ever published a paper that even specifically defines TA patterns. how can something be tested that has no objective definitions? Yes, the paper is a great start , but can hardly be called conclusive. what tools do you reccomend to properly test TA and trend following since statistical methods fall short, per your statement above. surfer
Are there flaws in TA approaches? Yes obviously. Who does not use TA at all and in no respect whatsoever? Any takers?
last time i spoke with him, jim rogers stated he does not use TA. Dave: Do you use technical analysis at all? Jim: No, its pretty simple just figuring out what is going on in the world. I try to find things that are cheap and invest in them if I see some positive change coming. I donât understand the charts. Donât misunderstand me, I do look at the charts, but I only look at a simple long-term chart to see what has happened over the last 15 years or so, not to tell me what is going to happen in the future. For example, if I am looking at sugar, I want to know the high, the low, when, why, and things like that. I look at the charts to educate me, rather than a predicting tool. surfer
At face, that seems to be an exercise in futility. Perhaps I am mistaken because I do not rely on chart "patterns" per se in my trading, but I would think that anyone who relied solely on them in the absence of a complete trading strategy is on a waiting list for disappointment. TA is not necessarily limited solely to the usual, generic patterns or indicators. I suspect that your Dr. Lo already knew that, but simply wanted to publish a paper. The only worthwhile test is the test of one's own trading strategy. A complete TA trading strategy may or may not use patterns or indicators. It can use neither and still be considered TA because it relies on past market behavior (in one form or another) to determine entry and exit points. And guess what? No one in his right mind is going to submit a hard earned method in its entirety for someone else's scrutiny. Well, I certainly wouldn't, anyway. If someone's strategy makes money over time and in variable conditions, what possible purpose would outside vailidation serve? Surfer, why are you just making noise? A line from Macbeth comes to mind: "...full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."