Depends on the individual. Having studied the work of many, I find Al's work on context and market cycle (an evolution of context) as comprehensive as any. But he is not the only influence in my own trading.
There are contexts I refer as "pick your poison" where a bull and a bear scenario are near equal. I don't fade for the sake of fading but may opt for one or the other. If too equivocal, I will sit out until a setup presents a more attractive edge. Not taking a position is a trading decision and often a good one.
No offense, friend, but you’re an amateur studying “price action” from a guy who’s background is in medicine. Al brooks and most of these gurus have no professional experience trading or in markets…Imagine using a made up physics to describe the world lol. You are being fooled by randomness.
I might add to the discussion there are 81 bars on a 5m chart RTH’s. Both bulls and bears are active on all of those 81 bars. Money can be made on most all of them. The invisible institutions (think atoms and the power therein) in the bowl (context) bombard price and causes it to jiggle. So yes, brownian motion. ROFLMAO. The difference there ain’t a lot of things to jiggle. There is only one molecule to jiggle. Just one: PRICE. It ain’t like you got molecules going random directions. You got one molecule and it can only go in ONE, THATS RIGHT ONE….direction at time. And the bombarding of that ONE molecule by the atoms (institutions) create the “jiggle.” That jiggle can be big and strong (such as in strong BO’s) or it can be tiny as in small bars and sideways movement. The problem with longandshort is he is LONG on randomness and short on jiggles! Whereas I am short on randomness and long on jiggles! I grab them jiggles and giggle when the atoms give them to me! Good enough explanation for a likely Taleb disciple masquerading as a longand short? Actually his name is a dead giveaway of what he must really believe. If it is all random how does he know to go long or go short? He has to be “guessing” Guessing without factoring probability is gambling. His mistake is thinking the bowl is full of molecules and it only has one molecule (price) and good price action traders are watching that one molecule and the momentum of the jiggle to gauge how much the institutional bombardment is, in order to give them get a handle on the likely size of the jiggle and a reasonable PT. If we want to apply physic to trading think “inertia” and scrap traditional brownian BS. There is only 1 pollen seed in the bowl of water and when the atoms bombard it it can only jiggle in one direction at a time and that jiggle has inertia. ROFLMAO ROFLMAO ROFLMAO. Did I just say laugh? Now that is a multi jiggle I mean giggle!
Your ignorance feeds your view of "randomness", not uncommon but to be insistent on that view marks you as a fool. BTW, I am very fond the lifestyle provided by my "amateur" status
Lol, let me say this again -- you are learning about price action from a non-expert lol, you have no idea how the market actually functions...which I guess is okay if you are a hobbyist.
I had an economics professor in grad school who once said..."If you want ten different opinions about a thing, ask ten different economists."