Does technical analysis work or not?

[Fugazsy]

No it doesn't. Reason is the technicality could not show us a trader who have money twice. What he could have is not very useful. For instance, he could not use what he could have to pay for lunch.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

Looks like they are going to attack my previously stated trade, which is fine by me. I expected no less from them.

But now I have a better idea on where I want them to go. The upper trend line will do me. Is this TA ? Not really. I believe they believe that I believe in TA. So they think my stop is there. But it isn't. I want more size at that location.

If they don't go that far, it's no big deal. They will still have to payout on my existing trade.

This is fencing in action.

 

[barjon]

".........the difference being by how much price has broken the line"........

Db

Yes, that's the bit I was getting a bit tetchy about before. I just don't think that there can be anything near a definitive answer however much into it a trader might be.

A bit like my bread and butter stuff where I like to see some momentum behind a break rather than price staggering through like a drunken sailor. It's a bit wishful thinking though and there's not really that much difference between the two in final outcome. It looks the same so far as degree of sla breaks are concerned.

The skilful trader will probably not unravel the fuzziness, but manage things in such a way as to benefit or receive only minor injury when the market does the unraveling.

 

[dbphoenix]

Yes, that's the bit I was getting a bit tetchy about before. I just don't think that there can be anything near a definitive answer however much into it a trader might be.

A bit like my bread and butter stuff where I like to see some momentum behind a break rather than price staggering through like a drunken sailor. It's a bit wishful thinking though and there's not really that much difference between the two in final outcome. It looks the same so far as degree of sla breaks are concerned.

The skilful trader will probably not unravel the fuzziness, but manage things in such a way as to benefit or receive only minor injury when the market does the unraveling.

That's because you continue to confuse "primer" with "advanced". All that you "like to see" is irrelevant for those to whom the primer is addressed. The protocol provided by the primer encourages these traders to think as little as possible.

Some people borrow elements of the SLA and leave the rest behind, which is fine. But the SLA can't be expected to be as robust as it would be if it were traded as intended, which includes characterizing whatever instrument one is interested in, something which hardly anyone does, including professional traders.

Db

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

He was a great trader, his book is a gem and fully of great sentences:

No, his book was dull and was a failure. I could not get past a few pages of it before falling asleep. The book that someone else wrote about him was just a story book. It was written by a professional writer, and so it was slightly more interesting to read because it was a story. His original book was full of meaningless tables of numbers that created not an iota of interest. If I try read it now again, I will immediately fall asleep.

 

[barjon]

That's because you continue to confuse "primer" with "advanced". All that you "like to see" is irrelevant for those to whom the primer is addressed. The protocol provided by the primer encourages these traders to think as little as possible.

Some people borrow elements of the SLA and leave the rest behind, which is fine. But the SLA can't be expected to be as robust as it would be if it were traded as intended, which includes characterizing whatever instrument one is interested in, something which hardly anyone does, including professional traders.

Db

Maybe. As one moves towards advanced the need for judgement increases, albeit based on a better understanding of what one is looking at.

I've been trading a long time and I'm a reasonable trader (by my own lights if no-one -else's ) so I put that down to my good judgement. It's a comforting thought, but I guess that discipline on the trade and money management side of things carries the greater weight.

 

[metrader]

Looks like they are going to attack my previously stated trade, which is fine by me. I expected no less from them.

But now I have a better idea on where I want them to go. The upper trend line will do me. Is this TA ? Not really. I believe they believe that I believe in TA. So they think my stop is there. But it isn't. I want more size at that location.

If they don't go that far, it's no big deal. They will still have to payout on my existing trade.

This is fencing in action.

Trading styles are different, but I wouldn't spend too much time thinking what they believe. I would just take profit when available (trying to make it simple). You can always enter at a better price if it goes there and it's much easier to do if you wait without being in and with some extra money on your account.

It's not as exciting as fencing though

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

Trading styles are different, but I wouldn't spend too much time thinking what they believe. I would just take profit when available (trying to make it simple). You can always enter at a better price if it goes there and it's much easier to do if you wait without being in and with some extra money on your account.

It's not as exciting as fencing though

I am not looking for profit at the moment. I am looking for size. I am interested to bait them in to giving me the right size at the right price.

They are taking the bait. It's like fishing.

 

[metrader]

I am not looking for profit at the moment. I am looking for size. I am interested to bait them in to giving me the right size at the right price.

They are taking the bait. It's like fishing.

Clever trading there EnlightenedJoe

It's a different trading style - possibly much more rewarding than mine (taking small profits when ever they offer them)

Good luck with fishing Joe

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

possibly much more rewarding than mine

Well the position pays 6.187% daily interest on the margin I put up. Hence size is interesting to me. It means I get paid without needing to trade.

 

[darktone]

It wouldn't understand supply and demand either. Since you believe the market is about supply and demand, if your bot doesn't understand it, how can it possibly be successful ?

To counter your assertion that your bot can understand supply and demand, show us what your bot is saying. Where is supply and where is demand currently ?

The 'understanding' (or lack of) would be on the part of the programmer, the program executes the programmers perception of what is.
Unfortunately, even the most robust program must started and stopped at some point by a human tarder.

A long only approach would prolly look something like this.

 

[darktone]

Jesse was a loser. In the end the bank took all he's got. His failure was his size. If he kept his size small, the bank would not have been able to take him to the cleaners. I like his strategy, but wrong size.

The only thing that beat Jessie, was Jessie. Thats the 90% you seem to be missing Joe.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

The only thing that beat Jessie, was Jessie. Thats the 90% you seem to be missing Joe.

The bank beat him first before he took himself out of the picture. This can be proven because the bank had all his money.

People are not missing the 90% at all. They are just worst at business than the bank. So they lose.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

The 'understanding' (or lack of) would be on the part of the programmer, the program executes the programmers perception of what is.
Unfortunately, even the most robust program must started and stopped at some point by a human tarder.

A long only approach would prolly look something like this.

Since you believe 90% is yourself, you shouldn't blame the programmer that much.

So the TA/EA doesn't work is because of programmers. Assuming that is the case. TA/EA will never work because there's no way to bypass the programmers. Why continue to use it then ?

If you can't trust yourself, and you don't trust programmer's EA/TA, what is the reason to continue trading ?

 

[darktone]

The bank beat him first before he took himself out of the picture. This can be proven because the bank had all his money.
People are not missing the 90% at all. They are just worst at business than the bank. So they lose.

Ok, lets say im your natgas LP, and youre done baiting me into giving you all the short size you can carry, at the price you want.

It opens the week like this.

Who beat you? Was it me or was it you?

 

[darktone]

Since you believe 90% is yourself, you shouldn't blame the programmer that much.

So the TA/EA doesn't work is because of programmers. Assuming that is the case. TA/EA will never work because there's no way to bypass the programmers. Why continue to use it then ?

If you can't trust yourself, and you don't trust programmer's EA/TA, what is the reason to continue trading ?

The programmer being the trader Joe.
The trader might be aware of his or her own psychological weakness during the session and construct an EA to try and lessen the problem. The EA could be robust enough to profit in a variety of situations, yet still be sabotaged by the trader.

 

[darktone]

Theres also more than one way to trade TA :cheesy:
Anyone interested in the DOAT gold indicator can drop me a pm, although it can be a bit tricky here on T2W.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

Ok, lets say im your natgas LP, and youre done baiting me into giving you all the short size you can carry, at the price you want.

It opens the week like this.

Who beat you? Was it me or was it you?

If it opens like that I would say the bank is responsible. I don't see why you or I would be responsible.

If it doesn't open like that, it is still the bank that is responsible because they set the prices.

Of course the word bank I use is a synonym for whoever is running the market. I don't think I would be too far wrong to believe a bank is behind the business.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

The programmer being the trader Joe.
The trader might be aware of his or her own psychological weakness during the session and construct an EA to try and lessen the problem. The EA could be robust enough to profit in a variety of situations, yet still be sabotaged by the trader.

Well, I stated multiple times that TA/EA doesn't work and gave the reason for it. So if trader joe is not making profit from TA/EA, all I can say is yeah, I know.

I can suggest to trader joe to reduce size, then at least he won't lose so much. Running a small position to a big profit would be a perfectly logical and comparatively safe trading strategy.

 

[tokyojoe]

Good thread at last ! Does TA work ? In short no not imo, I've lost count of the many ways round I've learned the various ta.

It all boils down to speed of flow at the end of the day, it also has much to do with recognizing where the trapped traders are sweating their nads off, you can see it in the general flow, the trap is set, bosh !! they or we are sucked into the vortex in the blink of an eye.

I am with DT on one thing "I don't know sh1t"

Telling ourselves we can read stock charts & TA gets us nowhere after the moment of pulling the trigger if we do not recognize a trap. Anybody who has really got into the nitty gritty of a set up as it unfolds will know the set up is building (or being primed if you like) is it synthetic ?? we don't know, the trigger is pulled & then the real work begins. I am not interested in holding for any length of time.

Am I a nervous trader ? f@ck yea I am & anybody who knows the real damage that can be done with the sudden prospect of huge draw-down should be too !