So like any other analysis the landscape will alter as trading takes place.
So what’s your point?
No analysis is poured in concrete. .
Yes there is, it's called 'elliot wave'. It’s got concrete boots on and at
the bottom of the harbour, where it should remain.
If you want to continue to use a lame methodology then there is a
Elliot wave thread that needs some help. it's deadly silent.
Expectations,targets and projections all move with the market. What is clear at the beginning of the day may not be as clear during or toward the end of the day/week/month/year.
.
Let me explain this clearly.
Trading is about finding patterns in the market and trading with
entry techniques with 'least risk'.
Once you find those patterns you trade-manage them.
I want to know where those patterns are in advance not after the 'fact'.
I want to be trading the trend before others get on it, and want to
get off the trend before others realise what's going on.
How a position trader trades is going to be different to how a day trader is
going to trade even though they are trading within same multi-frame
model.
As a day trader, all I care is finding trades using 'least risk', either
trading with the trend or against the trend, and I think I’ve
certainly described that in detail:- spiral point trading and 5-day
patterns and using intra-day patterns of 21-42 points.
I’m long stocks so I’m not missing any of this move in the market, but I’m
certainly not going to trade the same if an opportunity presents itself and
I can short a 'money pattern' of 21-42 points moves intra-day.
I could be shorting a higher point in a rising trend because I know that
there is a statistical bias and potential 21-42 point rotation downward.
If price moves above the ‘high probability level’, which once again has
been hardcoded that everyone can see and use, then you have a
statistical bias to either cover positions or switch into the change of
trend, once again trading a 'money pattern':- least Risk & reward
I work with a methodology, theory and mutl-timeframe Model that
has statistical reliability and statistical probability, that has been
hardcoded and objective along with certain 'principles and rules'
I have no doubt a ‘Dilernia princple’ will fix it
.
The important part in all my analysis, was that it was described in detail in
this thread that some people continue to ignore. I was using an
objective model that everyone else can use, and they can see it plan as
day. I have rules and
prinicples so that patterns in the market can be anticapted in advance and traded accordingly.
1. Market to continue down in 2009, known from 2008
2. March lows reversal and 30% percent swing upwards:- known in advance
3. APRIL, MAY , June highs and precise tops in the market with the
expectation price would come back down into the 3rd Quarter 50% level:- known in advance.
4. 3rd Quarter Thrust pattern towards 4400, known in advance.
5. June high break out and extension pattern into August highs 4313:- which is always part of a Quarterly Thrust pattern:- Known in advance
Of course the actual outcome is not known in advance, but we are
trading statistical probability & reliability that the actual outcome will act accordingly, and we trade accordingly to our
'a window into the future'
It beggars belief that people still want to use methodologies that
were written 100 years ago (EW and Gann) that rarely stands up in a
real-time trading environment.
They are so fixed out the actual outcome of their subjective analysis that
they find it hard to adapt to the changing market dynamics:- Daily,Weekly and so on.....
Im sure Frank will address your points
I think I've explained myself and there is enough useful information in
this thread that i'm sure many readers have used in the past or are
currently using at this time but won't acknowledge it.
They will only briefly mention in passing comment, as ‘ the other methodology’ .
Back to Trading and making a buck.