Technical Analysis = Astrology?

[onemind]

Unfortunately the number of people who truly understand statistics is small. This is especially true among professions where statistical analysis is the most important - medicine. The level knowledge is depressingly low.

Well the guy that wrote the book is a statistician and his findings are the exact opposite. If you think you can prove him wrong with your statistical mastery i take my hat off to you..

 

[chops_a_must]

There is not a pattern in the world that can predict it enough times to be profitable long term. If there was, there would be a ton of gazillionaires getting rich off the reliable compound interest from their reliable system.

The point is, you don't have to predict squat to make money trading.

And there are a ton of gazillionaires out there, and they have got rich off of people with poor risk and money management.

 

[markrmau]

The probabilities are will it go up, or will it go down.

And there is no way of knowing which way it will go until it happens. There is not a pattern in the world that can predict it enough times to be profitable long term. If there was, there would be a ton of gazillionaires getting rich off the reliable compound interest from their reliable system. What your saying is finding something with a greater probability of going your way in essence, removing risk and obtaining unlimitied rewards. There is no such systems and these probabilities you think you can work out are unattainable with historic data.

Show me one pattern that has a statistacally relevent probability and i will eat my hat..

Uhm, actually, I am agreeing with you. All of the published indicators are statistically useless. I have tested them.

You should also read http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_04_29_a_blowingup.htm

 

[onemind]

The point is, you don't have to predict squat to make money trading.

So what are you talking about? This isnt a discussion about money management which in turn has nothing to do with t/a.

You were talking about finding positive expectancy and i was talking about how there is no such thing..

 

[onemind]

Thanks for the link Mark, I'll check it out..

 

[chops_a_must]

So what are you talking about? This isnt a discussion about money management which in turn has nothing to do with t/a.

You were talking about finding positive expectancy and i was talking about how there is no such thing..

There is not a pattern in the world that can predict it enough times to be profitable long term.

 

[onemind]

you've got nothing mate..

 

[wayneL]

So what are you talking about? This isnt a discussion about money management which in turn has nothing to do with t/a.

You were talking about finding positive expectancy and i was talking about how there is no such thing..

ROTFLMAO You're taking the p1ss aren't you?

 

[Magdoran]

I think the whole point of science it to be objective.

If you have some kind of subjective ability that works for you but i lack, then thats great but of no use to anyone but yourself..

I don't know why I'm bothering with this puerile nonsense… but…

Ever heard of the “uncertainty principle” by Heisenberg?

Einstein came up with much of the foundations in theory that later provided the key foundations to develop the atom bomb at the start of the 1900s…

Just because you can’t demonstrate a scientific proof about something that works in the present up to an academic standard doesn’t mean you can’t do so in the future.

Next you’ll be telling me my recent calls to within +/- 1 trading day and one call within 1 index point, and the other within 7 index points were “lucky” huh? Look at my DAX call on the Trading the SPI GANN thread, and see the key dates I gave well in advance, and where the index changed trend on these dates…

But in reality I’m deluding myself, aren’t I “onemind”. It really didn’t happen, did it? Nor all the other calls I’ve made in private. These were just pure luck, weren’t they, because really the markets are totally random, aren’t they - or was that totally manipulated? Same thing isn’t it?

Actually, I see the light, it’s whatever you say it is “onemind”. If you say some crank book of random walk doctrine is true, then I believe you. Night is day, white is black, “onemind” is GOD!!!!

Wow, I can forget all the years of research I put into derivatives and technical analysis, and scream Halleluiah! My saviour “onemind” will deduce methodically how to trade the market for me “objectively” and give me the scientific formula, won’t you?

Look forward to your unification of particle and wave theory too, and your dissertation on string theory, super gravity and membrane theories, and why your perspective should become the dominant paradigm.

Of course George Soros was lucky, Jim Rodgers was lucky, Robert Prechter was lucky, Bill McLaren was lucky… just add anyone in the market that built a fortune… just luck, wasn’t it?

 

[onemind]

Sorry, i just seen the word gann and everthing in my mind turned to ridicule..

Of course George Soros was lucky, Jim Rodgers was lucky, Robert Prechter was lucky, Bill McLaren was lucky… just add anyone in the market that built a fortune… just luck, wasn’t it?

Read the link Mark posted..

 

[onemind]

ROTFLMAO You're taking the p1ss aren't you?

Nope..

 

[wayneL]

We are wasting our time here.

Over and out.

 

[onemind]

likewise..

to each their own

 

[Magdoran]

Sorry, i just seen the word gann and everthing in my mind turned to ridicule..



Read the link Mark posted..

I have read the article, and Soros’ “The Alchemy of Finance”, and Frank Partnoy’s “Infectious Greed" (which chronicles the game of derivatives including the demise of “Long Term Capital Management” as mentioned in the article).

I am very well versed in “reflexivity”, and “dynamic disequilibrium”, and use then constantly as the backdrop to my whole financial approach. Wether Gorge actually fobbed it off or not as an aside is irrelevant, it is still a very powerful perspective, particularly if you understand Karl Popper's philosophy, and what Soros in effect does with this (Soros was trained in philosophy under Popper – bet you didn’t know that now did you?).

There is so much apocryphal nonsense in the article despite it being well written with some knowledge of financial markets, but its premise is wonky. The idea that a minority will randomly move to the top financially is fanciful. That was why Soros was my first listed person, and Jim Rodgers the second (you probably don’t know that Rodgers was the key partner with Soros when the Soros fund quadrupled in a year – of course this was just random though, wasn’t it?).

Yes, chance and luck play a part in finance, but this is because no one is entirely objective, omniscient and omnipotent (except you of course), but it seems ironic that one minute you are championing scientific objectivity, and then postulating that the financial world is entirely random.

You could have argued that Collateralised Debt Obligations and Collateralised Mortgage Obligations have random yields too and the demise of ENRON was just unlucky, right? … But instead you cheaply fob me off with a pathetic one liner.

Come on “onemind” let’s get serious, if you think “Gann is bunk” how much are you willing show your financial prowess against one of my calls? Bring it on buddy!

Let’s see if you can do better than a cheap one liner next time since you are the “savoir” for a slow Friday night’s entertainment!

 

[onemind]

Wow, stock boxing

He did fob it off and its your backdrop.

Gann, well, need i say more?

 

[Magdoran]

Wow, stock boxing

He did fob it off and its your backdrop.

Gann, well, need i say more?

Coward

 

[Magdoran]

Wow, stock boxing

He did fob it off and its your backdrop.

Gann, well, need i say more?

Is that all you've got?

 

[onemind]

I cant gamble with you because if i won i would know it was luck but if you won you would think you are psychic..

 

[nizar]

Magdoran - so your a Maclaren fan?
I read he recently called a June top for our markets, thats mad, two months to PARTAY!

 

[Magdoran]

I cant gamble with you because if i won i would know it was luck but if you won you would think you are psychic..

But you can’t lose because you are omnipotent…