Why does TA not work (for you)?

Yes, absolutely. I would be thrilled to see a "forex" trader demonstrate on collective 2 or covestor-- 3 months of profitable trading using TA. Show me! surf

 

Surfer, aren't you going to acknowledge WRB's post?

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=247024&perpage=6&pagenumber=111

 

THE STRATEGY IS TO WAIT UNTIL THESE TWO INDICATORS COINCIDE AT THE SAME TIME TO PROVIDE THE SIGNAL.

THERE ARE ABOUT 55 STOCKS IN MY QUE AND THESE SIGNALS OCCUR ONLY ONCE OR SOMETIMES TWICE IN A DAY WHEN I WATCH THE MARKET FROM 9:30 TO 11:30. TODAY ONLY 26 SEPARATE CHARTS SHOWED THE SIGNAL. 24 WOULD HAVE MADE MONEY.


DATE MKOP W/L WIN%
8-2 UP 27/3 90%
8-3 UP 18/1 95%
8-6 DWN 18/1 95%
8-7 UP 35/8 81%
8-8 DWN 47/1 98%
8-9 DWN 24/2 92%

 

The way around this issue is to demonstrate in real time on a third party verification site-- there are several.

The hated Tim Sykes is the ONLY elite member to EVER demonstrate consistent profits via a 3rd party veriifier.

I challenge ANY TA USER to show 90 days of over all profitable trades on a third party verification site. If so, I will recant my position that I don't believe it can be done via TA. anyone???

Logicman, Redneck Nodoji, BR, Cornx forex-- anyone up for it?

 

I don't remember what he is referring to-- i am not surprised however that the results were not much different than randomness.

Show me on collective 2 or any other verification site-- 3 months of profitable trades. STARTING NOW, not past records. How hard can that be? Let's not keep going into the past,

 

Did you just make up the part about the results being no different than "randomness"? Where did WRB say that?

 

Luck, randomness --- correct he didn't say it directly, he did say i attributed the results to luck-- which to me is part of randomness---

sorry for the confusion.

any takers on the challenge?

 

5-7 months of luck? Wow, that guy was sure lucky!! Good thing only 90 days is needed this time! LMAO

 

You clearly misunderstood my post.

I didn't say "it can't be quantified", what I said was that the "trend logic" has to drive the quantification on a case by case basis. The quantification is more like an algebraic equation than a single number. Real-time and historical data get fed through the equations to come up with the number for that specific context. The "probabilities" refer to all instances where that equation is used to generate a trade.

Expecting someone to come out and say "It takes 3 moves of 1.42% to make a trend" is ridiculous. The market is obviously much more subtle than that.

 

That's what he says. I don't remember that thread-- -- please post it again, would like to see it-- as I don't believe its as stated....

surf