"Quote from wrbtrader: There's a lot more to profitable trading than just TA. That's why I say that I've never met a consistently profitable trader using TA and nothing else (no money management, no discipline, not properly capitalized, no trading experience, no understanding of market context, no proper equipment, no trading plan to organize everything)...nothing...just TA all by itself. " I must have missed it but is this what Market Surfer's point is about?
you are doing the "funnel" for getting to FTT in volume. We need to do true/false for our test procedure. set up columns on a log: P1, T1, P2........ At T2 w need to go subfractal. So on the right wind up with T3P and T3F which stand for FTT and failing to have FTT (in price terms. here we let P3F be assigned to a bar and it has no other name. reread the prior solution to the third move of price in a trend. (See the tuesday chart that could be worked with.) Dominance is moving from right to left between limiting sloped parallel lines for price (Base ten Algebra is often usd for this.) domance goes from the RTL to the LTL. I want to ease you into a frame of mind that handles all that remains. Making money takes care of itself. On a trading platform you just hit T to do a reversal. You set the contracts to twice the number being held. It is an exit/entry procedure. gradually you work up to 5 times the market capacity and partial fills rip down your print sheet so fast they cannot be read. Beetween P2 and P3F column (P3P is to the right of P3F), put 6 columns. Number them from 1 to 6. we will be doing T and F in all the columns that are part of the trend continuing. for logicman's middle, he has one column. You have 9 columns. So now you know that in the subfractal there will be volume signals that tell you MORE and MORE. I showed you the P3F that happened bfore the P3P on Tuesday. thee was one shaddow bar as well. It is just there saying wait. Use W in your "events" column way to the right. T2 's have to be looked at more closely. not 50 shades of grey but 6 shades of T2. As in P3's there are passes and fails. Look at the logic blocks that Carnap invented. they have two outlets that are opposite. All two wire (input) sytems of ANDS or ORs have four possible outcomes. that is what separates AND's and OR's. you are also using "compare" circuits in the form of "records". with the above, I have covered all of SQL and the language's ooperation in RDBMS. It is all there and totally "CERTAIN" at all times. As you test you get answers. The system is what is called "repeatable". It always works and always works properly. i worked in many "think tanks" in many locations. Many profitble businesses were spawned. Once I did a TFSE of five into one publically traded parent. It got attention since it was next to Apple (in the alphabetically lisitings) So now I have given you the names of the six slots. i have also explained the absolutely parallel logic of a fractal and its sub. Most people cannot grasp this. Go back to Tuesday and see how to begin. Keynes gve us the paradigm theory, Carnap the logic theory. Boole the algebra. Nothing can compete. We front run the statisiticulators who use lagging mathematics. I had K, C and B the first day I saw a chat. Serendipity struck. I did circuits as flow chats of the market from day one. I made a chart to pencil in the dailies from the WSJ. i stopped working and moved to Greenwich. Cocktail parties were revealing. I was followed to Switzerland. What is so lucky is that no one can can step out of he CW mold after they have cept in just so far. All I did at the beginning was four sectors. they wiggled the more familiar sectors. High beta. Pharma, Mach tools, paper and one other. GO SUB with WHAT YOU ALREADY KNOW. QED.
Don't recall NoD saying that TA setups can never have better than 50/50 odds... But odds/hitrate are actually not important. You may have 25% hit rate and be extremely successful trader. What interests me more, though, is why are you so negative towards intuitive market reading stage? If you admit it exists, what stops you from just developing it for yourself?
What? I am not negative toward intuitive market reading. In fact, I believe it's the only way TA even has the potential of working. Yes, I agree about hit rate, so my random entry theory makes sense to you? Random entries with solid management and skills will produce similar results thn TA based entries. I am negative on objective fixed TA systems--- they simply don't work regardless of the rhetoric. If they did, you would all be wise trade green light red light millionaires. Even TA priests like WRB get this, when he says he never met a successful TA trader without many other factors at play. I argue that these same folks would be successful without TA. But with the other factors. How much evidence does it take to show objective TA is BS? Is the attraction really that powerful? Surf Ps. The market holds the greatest attraction to those least suited for it.
You really believe people who trade TA for years never tested such a primitive idea as random entries with different kinds of money management applied?
So you are in a twist about the type of data used, is that it? If you took order and graphed it for visual use, guess what you have? An indicator! So instead instead of graphing your data you are using spreadsheets and waiting for certain drivers to line up. And that is not TA, you say. Really?