Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Technical Analysis - Beginners -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MechanicalMethod who wrote (11467)	2/8/2001 12:29:25 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12039

you write then write about the process because any edge given away becomes lost in the efficient market theory or whatever that causes it’s value to dissipate. I bet this could be a topic of good discussion. Efficient market theory. Chaos theory. I'm sure we all have theories. I have a total lack of theory. :) I don't think there are any absolutes except for greed and fear and that there are a wide range of tolerances for risk and stress out there. Swing highs and lows are watched by many players, and there are either a lack of buyers or sellers at a high or low to overwhelm the other, or there aren't. It will always be this way. Sure, some techniques become well know - i.e. shooting stars when the Nasdaq was ramping up - were frequently broken to the upside; prior to the tremendous rise, candlestick traders made good money off of such things. Simple example, I know. Things do change. The critical thing for traders is to note when things no longer work and develop new rules (including staying away if that's the right answer!) to deal with the change. Perhaps you will discover some relationship that pans out a certain way in a certain market, and perhaps it will be unique and give you an edge. But I think the larger currents of greed and fear, swing highs and lows, will continue to drive people as they always have. Most of the "classic" stuff first discussed tens and in some cases hundreds of years ago still rings true, even though 'everyone' knows about them. Bottom line I think that how people use the information is much more important. I've seen a good market tool (setup, trading rules, etc) in the hands of a good trader and a highly emotional, undisciplined trader, with predictable results. ?

To: MechanicalMethod who wrote (11467)	2/8/2001 6:17:43 PM
From: Teresa Lo	Respond to of 12039

"...if you have an edge and give it away then you longer have that edge. If you write a book and excuse me if I’m mistaken but I thought that’s where you were going in your contribution to the TA community message – anyway if you do write then write about your process rather than giving us another speed indicator because any edge given away becomes lost in the efficient market theory or whatever causes it’s value to dissipate..." Thanks for the long story. My fundamental belief is that there but one model of market mechanics and that all methods that do not take this into account are doomed to fail. That said, the model is rigid only in its framework, the concept. This was laid down by Charles Dow and William Peter Hamilton 100 years ago. Robert Rhea chronicled it in his book in the 1920s. This brings us back to what Gann said, that in the market, there is nothing new under the sun. I have seen a lot of comments written about "the edge" and how so many people go to absolutely bizarre lengths to protect it. I have never believed that this is true. For example, my "speedometer", and its how, when and why, have all been disclosed right here, while it's in the making, but how many people even care or believe that it is useful? Of the people who believe, how many of them will ever understand? Of the people who understand, how many will apply it correctly, assuming that I am able to do so myself? Of the people who can apply it correctly, how many people will be trading the same instrument and timeframe as me? And so on it goes... In the end, I think it has been proven that entries using the "dartboard" or the CNBC chicken works, so long as there is risk and money management, so I suppose my theories can be thrown up there with these two examples :o) Interesting article: streetstories.com Teresa