Yeah, Brett's a great guy. Know he use to be a TA true believer also untill he really analyzed it? Keep an open mind, before you lose all your money, you may "get it" also. Yeah, if you REALLY think it works, then cool, go for it. Just like kreskin and other psychics. Be sure not to slip into the gamblers fallacy, however! http://www.skepdic.com/gamblers.html Once again, if you flip a coin 10 times and get heads 10 times, are you in a heads trend? How many moves or series of moves in one direction increase the odds of the next move or series being in the same/different direction?
Read this and get back to me: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0073386626/roberttoddcarrolA/ Surf PS: the more I read on this thread, the more I am convinced that TA is tantamount to consumer fraud. Check out the FX dealers-- they win, when you lose--- guess what, they love promoting TA- for free! Wonder why.
non-stationarity as it applies to trading is much much much more complex than simply "ever-changing cycles" as Dr. Steenbarger suggests, or volatility for that matter
Did you read that paper you posted? He describes how he uses objective TA to trade. No mention of intuition or "price drivers", it's all objective mathematical analysis of past price.
Its not the same system over and over, it changes constantly with the market. Hence, my adversion to fixed objective TA. Some traders on this thread even go as far to assert their system will work across all markets and has worked for decades. Ridiculous!
Hehe... You reminded about this great example taken from Taleb's "Black Swan": There are two people: Dr John, who is regarded as a man of science and logical thinking. Fat Tony, who is regarded as a man who lives by his wits. A third party asks them, "assume a fair coin is flipped 99 times, and each time it comes up heads. What are the odds that the 100th flip would also come up heads?" Dr John says that the odds are not affected by the previous outcomes so the odds must still be 50:50. Fat Tony says that the odds of the coin coming up heads 99 times in a row are so low (less than 1 in 6.33 Ãâ 1029) that the initial assumption that the coin had a 50:50 chance of coming up heads is most likely incorrect. There's a hint in this example, in the context of TA too... But I will probably refrain from further discussion until the time comes... Have a good day!