Present data has been explained to you in more than one previous thread. You have an annoying trait of ignoring any information that contradicts your predetermined conclusions. Any confusion is purely your own.
Yet, I know that you would like to see more uniform understanding of what is TA. That's something I strongly wish the same too but maybe its our nature as traders that prevents many from developing some sort'uv international standard considering TA in North America is the same TA in Asia Pacific, South America, Europe or whatever.
Unaware of what? Where's the evidence? I believe you if you say you successfully use subjective intuitive TA-- I have no reason not to-- my issue is with folks who say they succesfully use objective TA with consistent profits over time. I should be out in the Caribbean right now sailing-- instead I am stuck in the Omphoy PB waiting for the storm to blow over-- so I'll answer you. In order to say that objective TA works ( to a degree of consistent profits) you are dismissing years of academic studies proving otherwise. You are saying that objective TA traders live lives of monetary success-- whereas the evidence is the opposite. You are saying that TA can be quantified (which it has to be to be objective)-- if it can quantified, why cant TA traders corner a market, any market? remember you have an edge greater than 50/50 that is quantifiable and programmable. Instead, the truth is, objective TA traders are generally relegated to the backwaters of the market with only anecdotal evidence and years of struggle because the premise is fatally flawed. Rather than think outside the box to develop real edge, TA traders keep beating their head and following gurus. Best wishes, surf
Guessing? Gambling? I am a huge proponent of using analytics for trading-- just not on past data. TA is the use of PAST price data to suppos.edly project future probabilities. This makes no sense and does not work when applied objectively-- maybe it works intuitively or otherwise--- I don't know everyone who uses it, but they sure defend it rigorously Using analytics on OTHER data sets than PAST PRICE can provide an edge in the market.
How about this: TA is the study of past price/volume data with the goal of projecting probabilities of future price movement?
ALL data has become the past as soon as you see it. As soon as you see it as data...it is already past data. Thus, you suggesting one can do or should only do analysis on data that has yet become into existence. If so, I'm very curious how we (I) can do such (serious question) ? Maybe this gets into your inability or refusal to define or give a hypothetical example of a before the fact signal call. I'm now more curious about your commentaries because I think there's a connection with your recent commentaries (e.g. before the fact) and your now above quote that implies doing analysis on data that is not yet in existence as something that can provide an edge in the market. P.S. I do understand you're making a distinction between "other data" versus "past price". Without your example of "other data", I will just consider it a smoke screen on your part in your effort to continue arguing and trolling. P.S.S. ET has a section called "Data Sets and Feeds" @ http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=66
pure bs ,there is no other set, just admit you like to get a rise out of people and this whole couple of weeks is just that,a waste of everyones time