It seems the problem alludes to what is, and what isn’t relevant; knowing what is/isn’t relevant, seeing what is/isn’t relevant (and at this time of night (morning), this is one can of worms).
On a very basic level, there will not be a consensus. So we could ask, Why not? Perhaps because the markets appear, to a greater or lessor extent (and this will be disputed), random and unpredictable. So we try to impose our own order – we “tend to focus on evidence that supports [our] market view” (Zup). And because we have various degrees of strength and weakness, perhaps we utilise what we can – our strengths, strengths which may be inappropriate. So if Timsk is ‘visual’, his strength or advantage could be in seeing patterns (in charts). Personally, despite being an ‘arts’ person, I prefer numbers (albeit not on a high level) to the visual. My interest is not what something is, but what it isn’t. For example, at the moment I’m working on a system for scalping futures. I’m not looking at price levels, support or resistance (too variable), or distributions, but the opposite – where prices rarely go (and I don’t mean five sigmas), in other words, limits. I digress.
“people who see the gorilla have greater problem solving / reasoning skills” (Jackoclubs). In my experience (with retail clients) I have found no correlation between success in business, academic achievement, or any other quantifiable measure. Those with an average education in mundane occupations are no less successful in investing/trading than their so-called superiors. So what is relevant; and can it be acquired and developed?
Grant.
On a very basic level, there will not be a consensus. So we could ask, Why not? Perhaps because the markets appear, to a greater or lessor extent (and this will be disputed), random and unpredictable. So we try to impose our own order – we “tend to focus on evidence that supports [our] market view” (Zup). And because we have various degrees of strength and weakness, perhaps we utilise what we can – our strengths, strengths which may be inappropriate. So if Timsk is ‘visual’, his strength or advantage could be in seeing patterns (in charts). Personally, despite being an ‘arts’ person, I prefer numbers (albeit not on a high level) to the visual. My interest is not what something is, but what it isn’t. For example, at the moment I’m working on a system for scalping futures. I’m not looking at price levels, support or resistance (too variable), or distributions, but the opposite – where prices rarely go (and I don’t mean five sigmas), in other words, limits. I digress.
“people who see the gorilla have greater problem solving / reasoning skills” (Jackoclubs). In my experience (with retail clients) I have found no correlation between success in business, academic achievement, or any other quantifiable measure. Those with an average education in mundane occupations are no less successful in investing/trading than their so-called superiors. So what is relevant; and can it be acquired and developed?
Grant.
