## The Problem with Technical Analysis

This is a discussion on The Problem with Technical Analysis within the Technical Analysis forums, part of the Methods category; Originally Posted by wallstreetwarrior87 You is well funny Me tinks you is a wind up merchant. Copy and paste my ...

Sep 7, 2017, 7:30pm   #46
Joined Aug 2017
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wallstreetwarrior87 You is well funny Me tinks you is a wind up merchant. Copy and paste my as*e. You need to tink about the markets more, not waste time with forecasting. You will be better trying to predict 07651226785. He is great at helping those with anger issues. G/L with whatever you are trying to achieve.
Oh dear, the trollers are really triggered aren't they ? They don't know their decimals and the difference between \$1.00 and \$100.0, they trade minnie mouse pennies and think they are Soros ! LOL. Obviously one of the 90 %. If they could " THINK " about what they were doing then they might get somewhere.

HAHAHA !

Sep 13, 2017, 12:02am   #47
Joined Oct 2015
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wisefoolx The problem with TA is simple, it's in its calculation, which is hardly ever objective and almost always subjective. Let's take the old example of drawing trend lines...Solution: Use linear regression... Now let's come to another bugbear of mine RSI. This is supposed to measure changes in the momentum... So why is it calculated by this concoction: RSI = 100 - (100 / 1+ RS)

im not sure where you are coming from here.. are you saying you are more of a systems trader using robots and don't like discretionary trading? (genuine question)

why does TA need to be objective? good teachers of the subject would not give you the impression that its objective, that wouldn't be accurate no

the calculation of RSI is maths, its objective, it measures what it measures. Who says its an objective measure of market momentum? not a good teacher of TA

Last edited by Kaeso; Sep 13, 2017 at 7:58am.

Sep 13, 2017, 7:48am   #48
Joined Feb 2002
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kaeso hi WF, interesting thread.. im not sure where you are coming from here.. are you saying you are more of a systems trader using robots and don't like discretionary trading? (genuine question) why does TA need to be objective? good teachers of the subject would not give you the impression that its objective, that wouldn't be accurate no the calculation of RSI is maths, its objective, it measures what it measures. Who says its an objective measure of market momentum? no good teacher of TA

Its a good try Kaeso to get to the heart of the argument but its not going to go anywhere.

Vehement critics of TA set it up as something which it is not, they set it up to do something which it cannot do. Then they can easily knock it down and say "Ha-ha, TA doesn't work and I've proved it!" Even highly reputable authors and organisations are guilty of this sort of trick. What they can then criticise is a TA method that no winning trader uses, so of course they can say it doesn't work.

TA's like any sort of tool - used wrongly it won't work, used correctly it will.

Sep 13, 2017, 7:56am   #49
Joined Oct 2015
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tomorton Its a good try Kaeso to get to the heart of the argument but its not going to go anywhere..
cheers

Quote:
 Originally Posted by tomorton Vehement critics of TA set it up as something which it is not, they set it up to do something which it cannot do. Then they can easily knock it down and say "Ha-ha, TA doesn't work and I've proved it!" Even highly reputable authors and organisations are guilty of this sort of trick. What they can then criticise is a TA method that no winning trader uses, so of course they can say it doesn't work. TA's like any sort of tool - used wrongly it won't work, used correctly it will.
youve seen this in some detail then, nicely put thanks

Sep 13, 2017, 1:22pm   #50
Joined Aug 2017
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kaeso hi WF, interesting thread..
No, not really , if it were you would not have misquoted me.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kaeso im not sure where you are coming from here.. are you saying you are more of a systems trader using robots and don't like discretionary trading? (genuine question)
You need to re-read original post, never saind anything about " robots ".

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kaeso why does TA need to be objective? good teachers of the subject would not give you the impression that its objective, that wouldn't be accurate no
Once again, this has been dealt with but I will c&p if you insist:

A future price is a number in the future which is itself based on numbers. Therefore why should we not use the calculation of number to analyse prices (maths which is objective) ?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kaeso the calculation of RSI is maths, its objective, it measures what it measures. Who says its an objective measure of market momentum? not a good teacher of TA
Momentum is a concept well establish in physics and is calculated by p = m * v, where is p = momentum , m = mass and v = velocity.

What not use that instead of something concocted by Welles Wilder ?

Sep 13, 2017, 1:25pm   #51
Joined Aug 2017
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kaeso hi WF, interesting thread.. im not sure where you are coming from here.. are you saying you are more of a systems trader using robots and don't like discretionary trading? (genuine question) why does TA need to be objective? good teachers of the subject would not give you the impression that its objective, that wouldn't be accurate no the calculation of RSI is maths, its objective, it measures what it measures. Who says its an objective measure of market momentum? not a good teacher of TA
Quote:
 Originally Posted by tomorton Its a good try Kaeso to get to the heart of the argument but its not going to go anywhere. Vehement critics of TA set it up as something which it is not, they set it up to do something which it cannot do. Then they can easily knock it down and say "Ha-ha, TA doesn't work and I've proved it!" Even highly reputable authors and organisations are guilty of this sort of trick. What they can then criticise is a TA method that no winning trader uses, so of course they can say it doesn't work. TA's like any sort of tool - used wrongly it won't work, used correctly it will.

Give me one quote where I have said " TA doesn't work " , don't put words in my mouth, thank you.

Tea leaves , crystal balls and even TA may work .... so what ?

Sep 13, 2017, 1:27pm   #52
Joined Aug 2017
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Kaeso cheers youve seen this in some detail then, nicely put thanks
All the mutual glad handing and other kinds of handing won't hide the fact that you made up your mind on this topic even before I replied you, so what is the point of even asking me a question ?

The troller inside you is beginning to show.

Sep 13, 2017, 1:29pm   #53
Joined Apr 2016
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wisefoolx Tea leaves , crystal balls and even TA may work .... so what ?
But it doesn't because you can't demonstrate it to work.

Sep 13, 2017, 1:41pm   #54

Joined May 2003
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wisefoolx .........A future price is a number in the future which is itself based on numbers. Therefore why should we not use the calculation of number to analyse prices (maths which is objective) ? Momentum is a concept well establish in physics and is calculated by p = m * v, where is p = momentum , m = mass and v = velocity...........
I'm assuming that you do want to discuss rather than just have us accept your assertion without question.

It seems to me that we are all looking for momentum but, so far as I know, there is no decent indicator like a speedo or rev counter to help us. Watching how price is moving is probably the best we've got.

I don't think any mathematical formula is going to help, particular since you'd be hard pressed to define the variables - what's "mass" for example. Furthermore, if price movement can be reduced to formulaic mathematics then the mathematicians would have had the market cracked long ago. There's no evidence that they have.

 The following members like this post: dbphoenix , Oscar Reed
Sep 13, 2017, 2:52pm   #55
Joined Aug 2017
Quote:
 Originally Posted by barjon I'm assuming that you do want to discuss rather than just have us accept your assertion without question. It seems to me that we are all looking for momentum but, so far as I know, there is no decent indicator like a speedo or rev counter to help us. Watching how price is moving is probably the best we've got. I don't think any mathematical formula is going to help, particular since you'd be hard pressed to define the variables - what's "mass" for example. Furthermore, if price movement can be reduced to formulaic mathematics then the mathematicians would have had the market cracked long ago. There's no evidence that they have.
It'd be a start. I wasn't going to say this publically but how about volume for mass... ? Mathematicians know maths but they don't know the markets , you need both. Also they tend to use statistics and not maths.

 Sep 13, 2017, 3:32pm #56 Joined Oct 2009 Mass = volume Volume = decision Decision = Reason There for, without an understanding of reason, volume (mass) = nothing of value. Whether it be mathematical, objective, subjective.
 Sep 13, 2017, 4:35pm #57 Joined Apr 2016 Forget all this sh*t and just bet £30/point should get things moving in a jiffy. I guarantee it, and you won't have time for math after that.
Sep 13, 2017, 5:09pm   #58
Joined Feb 2002
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wisefoolx Give me one quote where I have said " TA doesn't work " , don't put words in my mouth, thank you. Tea leaves , crystal balls and even TA may work .... so what ?

I refer back to the title of the thread and the first line of your opening post. You spent the bulk of that post criticising trend lines and RSI. I already said I agreed with reservations on the use of these two tools but you haven't gone on to explain in any depth how your approach works better.

Obviously, your anti-TA bias is further revealed as you rank TA alongside tea leaves and crystal balls.

Sep 13, 2017, 6:04pm   #59

Joined May 2003
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wisefoolx It'd be a start. I wasn't going to say this publically but how about volume for mass... ? Mathematicians know maths but they don't know the markets , you need both. Also they tend to use statistics and not maths.
Ok, so rate of change (?) of price (or some other definition) x volume = momentum. Mmmm, maybe.

For me, directional momentum is one way traffic - minimal pullbacks before charging off again. Therefore, I don't see volatile price as having any directional momentum even when it has changed hugely from 10am to 11am (or whatever period) during which time it may have hit the highs and lows several times. As DBP has it, price is continuous and that change would just be an accident of timing.

Sep 13, 2017, 6:28pm   #60
Joined Oct 2015
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wisefoolx No, not really , if it were you would not have misquoted me. You need to re-read original post, never saind anything about " robots ". Once again, this has been dealt with but I will c&p if you insist: Momentum is a concept well establish in physics and is calculated by p = m * v, where is p = momentum , m = mass and v = velocity.What not use that instead of something concocted by Welles Wilder ? Give me one quote where I have said " TA doesn't work " , don't put words in my mouth, thank you.Tea leaves , crystal balls and even TA may work .... so what ?.All the mutual glad handing and other kinds of handing won't hide the fact that you made up your mind on this topic even before I replied you, so what is the point of even asking me a question ? The troller inside you is beginning to show
ok no actual answers to the questions just more confused babbling.. ill leave you to it