Thanks for the overview DC. An interesting path on the way to trading.
My 'initial response' in this thread as you term it, was just a topical aside relating to the privatisation of another forum. Sense of humour gets the better of me sometimes.
Your comments on many expecting Elliott to be an 'easy ride' is quite correct. It's always a lot easier to count the waves
after they've occurred
. As with every other piece of TA, when you're up against the hard right edge, it doesn't ever look quite the same. I've studied Gann far more than Elliott yet paradoxically, find there is an inherent simplicity to Elliott that seems to provide a more usable basis for trading, especially day trading. Perhaps it is the seeming complexity of Gann that requires the additional effort. But as you say, when faced with the multitude of angles and intersections, it's impossible NOT to see the price running nicely aliong one of the angles, and turning equally nicely at one of the many intersections. But having a high probability of confidence in any one over any other is the part that largely eludes my efforts. Be glad to hear how you tackle Gann.
You may find you generate some interest with your comment "known TA indicators like RSI very much to my own surprise using the indicators differently they were able to become predictive in stead of my previous lagging findings". While the premise of TA is that market action, or rather the probabilities of future market action can be deduced from past action, I think it's a brave soul who suggest any indicator can become truly predictive to any large degree of confidence. Do you use these well known indicators with Gann/Elliott or standalone?
I knew you and I were looking at the same stuff. Your comment about the Amsterdam AEX and planetary configurations is right up there with a bunch of research I started 3 years ago. Albeit on the NYSE. I have an on-going argument with anyone who divorces astrology from astronomy. Yes, I agree the tabloid 'astrology' is just a bit of fun (quite stupid, but then stupid people have to buy a newspaper of some kind...). They started off as one and the same discipline. The same root science. It is only recently that they have become different streams. You may have read Louise McWhirter's book "Astrology and Stock Market Forecasting"? Published in 1977 I managed to get a 2nd hand copy and found it tough going. She basically works a horoscope type approach to EVERYTHING, and a far more hocus pocus approach to use of empirical information which I find quite unusable. But what I did find useful was here approach to setting a base date for instruments and exchanges. Makes it a little difficult to with ECNs and individual traders with Direct Access, but for the major exchanges such as that which you are interested in, perhaps an avenue of research to follow?
You don't mention which cycle analysis you use. Ehler?
Thanks for taking the trouble to respond with such a comprehensive post. Always good to get a solid background.
