I do beg your pardon sir, but what breathtaking arrogance. Ask your PA cowboy friends how many of them bought USD.JPY at 106+, took half off at 112+, added back at 114+ and closed all out at 119+ when the market fell back and closed out the position. Not all of us choose to play for Twinkies daily.
There is not now nor ever been an edge to using RSI and MACD. --Meaning an edge over other traders. There is not now nor ever been an edge using SLA Scribbles. There is not now nor ever been an edge using any system of entries and exits. The edge in successful trading is in the prudent money management and trade management that a trader employs. RSI, MACD, Scribbles, Moving averages etc. all work the same as they always have. At the present moment, there is no testimonial or completeness in the SLA plan presentation. It is simply not credible as presented. The SLA has been thoroughly debunked.
You've missed the point of the thread. I am only [posting charts to show my method--not to prove whether it works or not. I am only posting trades to show that it's ok to post losing trades and also how to post trades. These things that I am doing are missing in a huge way from the SLA presentation. Also, the discussion of money management has "gone fishing" with regard to scribble presentation. Stops in any method are on the chart at the same place no matter what your account size is. You simply adjust your position to accommodate chart stops. For someone to present a plan and attract students without specific discussion of money management and stop placement is absolutely wrong. To present a plan without testimonial of live, real calls is wrong. It is one's responsibility to others to show testimonial evidence of actual trading and results if one is really trying to help.
The only orders that should be used are market orders. Most longer frame traders succeed on a much greater level than most day traders. Outraday traders need not work about ticks and can easily use market orders and not worry about ticks. Good intraday traders don't need to worry about ticks either.
The plan is way too subjective and cannot be automated. Marketsurfer pointed this out as well. Very good posting and point here auto
This is not true. If price spike up or down on the 5, you should know where you are on the 15 and 60. If they all agree on direction and the 60 and 15 are either oversold according to RSI and turning up in the case of a long, or overbought according to RSI and turning down on the case of a short. The analysis in the quoted posting here is singularly self-defeating.
Hats off to this scribble student for taking the time to post their thoughts that occurred through this trading day. What I think is important to note here, and the reason I posted this is the full-on subjective nature of the scribble method. This is part and parcel of the point that I, and others make, that the lines and method are arbitrary, As pertains to the first thought, the student shows hesitation as they view the noise and attempt to discern "rejection". The second musing is evidence of the arbitrary drawing of lines, using the term "tightly" and then again conjecture as to where to hold it. 3rd bullet point indicates misunderstanding of what to do. Point 4 is definitive. Thought 5 shows the individual questioning themselves again. Signpost 6 is a frank and laudible admission of paralysis by analysis. 7, honest testimony of trying to understand why sellers might be doing something and recognizing that the trade was most likely wrong from the start (the "why" is unimportant as a trading tool). Observation 8--Trader feels that market is colluding against him when he states that sellers did not want this to succeed. There is nothing wrong with what the trader has posted. In fact, he should be applauded for the honest and conspicuous manner in which he has revealed the facts. What we see here with the student's help is that even with much study, the SLA has people over-analyzing the data and attempting to read too many things into the information. In addition, they don't really know what to think. This indicates that the system is being presented as a much more complicated method than it needs to be. As you can see , the system is unenlightening and unremarkable. It is also confusing. "Not really in tune with the market. 1. Long at the ret after the sl brek but it is inside the ov tr, so I hesitated. I was ready to exit-scratch if there was a rejection down at the upper boundary of the OV TR. 2. Exit of previous long: it is dubious. It is true that a tightly drawn dl would be broken, but I think that I should have hold it just below the upper boundary of the OV TR. 3. I still do not understand why I did not reenter long at 1st or 2nd yellow circle. I was not focused. 4. Short at ret after break of dl. 5. When it was not able to go south of prior SH and made a DB I entered long reversing the position. Market stayed there for an eternity showing indecision and this could be read as a hinge. At least a consolidation, indecision period. Maybe I gave it too much space till I exited at 6. 6. There is a not triggered short marked ( triangle down and NT). I was waiting for market clearly going below of previous SH. The fact of focusing-waiting for the short to trigger (and a certain bias instead of being open to any posibility) made me miss the posible entry long marked at the 3rd yellow circle 7. Long. Took it but not happy too enter so late in the wave and so close to HOD where some reaction from sellers could be expected. Exit with loss. 8. Long again. Since it did not go down and formed a micro DB I entered again but seller did not want this to succeed. I think that seeing the big volume that came there and the rejection of the new highs, I could have taken my exit for a scratch earlier. End for the day."