Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I am humbled and honored to be in such fine company.
My feeling is that TA cannot guarantee that the market will not be moved by random extraneous events and/or new "fundamental" data points, but those typically have an effect for a few days at most and then the market eventually responds to its TA biases. For example, if the market is OB and something happens, like an especially good earnings report, that drives it even more OB, it just increases the probability that the selling will begin sooner and will be more severe. Even under manipulation by outside forces like the Fed liquidity policy, TA still applies as an overlay to the manipulated bias. Intraday especially, there are still OB/OS trading opportunities.
Hey, Guys...
Well, as Mongo predicted, he tossed me. Regardless of his "open discussion" policy BS, he simply cannot abide anyone who would dare to question the veracity of EW, even though the necessity to revise its predictions constantly speaks for itself. Anyway, I feel I am in good company with others he has banned and will post here infrequently. If anyone would like to see this mythical "system" of mine, just let me know and I'll be happy to give you a free tour...
So, there it is. I actually feel honored to be in such proud company. The man simply cannot abide anyone who doesn't agree with him, whether it be conducted with civility or otherwise. Didn't I say as much a while back here when you were singing his praises?
FWIW, I thought my last couple of posts there before he pulled the plug were very nice. What is curious is that he has not deleted my posts. I guess he doesn't want everyone to know how childish he is, since I would suspect that most don't check the Banned list very often, but that should be patently obvious.
The slope of the MACD(10,66) has now gone negative, so look for the overall direction of the market to be down for the next 2 - 3 weeks.
For anyone who is not familiar with the MACD, it is simply the difference between two EMAs of the specified lengths. It is more useful (IMHO) than a two EMA crossover because it allows you to catch more of the market moves from a high or low instead of waiting for the lines to cross. In this regard, the slope (first derivative) of the line is its instantaneous rate of change, and when that goes from postive to negative, the markets' next most likely sustained move will be down. However, there can always be outliers in any data set, so the slope is "smoothed" over an 11 day period, which prevents a one-day whipsaw from disrupting the trend.
Targets based on S/R lines and Fibonacci retracements are fine, but a target without a timeframe is next to useless for a trader. There is nothing "magic" or prescient about S/Rs and Fibs in that they are somehow revealing an underlying natural truth. It is only to the degree to which that if enough traders base their trading decisions on them, either individually or in program trading, they tend to become self-fulfilling. One of my biggest trading demons has always been to jump in too early, and if you had backed up the truck every time the arrival of wave iii has been loudly proclaimed here over the last six or seven months, you would have been crushed. In fairness however, in the current market environment, TA has not been all that effective either, but an early recognition that the market was being driven by artificially high liquidity compliments of the Fed would have allowed you to stay on the right side of the trade a large portion of the time (see my NDX chart a few posts back). Except for a few short-lived pullbacks, the direction (trend) of the market has been up and with yesterday's bounce back, whatever the cause, remains so. A good system measures what has actually happened, and in the context of where it is, i.e. OS, midrange, or OB, and in view of what the market has done previously in similar if not precisely the same conditions, recommends a position accordingly, and without presuming to know with 100% clarity whether that will be "correct", in case it isn't, to have good money management strategies incorporated. However, as Poker has said many times, it is the bottom line that counts, and it really doesn't matter how you get there. What anyone chooses to believe in is up to them, in whatever context they want to apply it, since they will ultimately reap the rewards or pay the consequences, and that is as it should be in the natural order of things, except for misguided schemes to redistribute weath (i.e. take from Peter to pay Paul).
Well, if he does then so be it, because I will be in good company, it will reflect more poorly on him than me, and will give me more time to focus on my trading.
Actually, I am quite fine, except for the fact that I don't believe in fairy tales.
In spite of the belief that it was pre-ordained, I think the 220K contract ES buy at 0902 (CT) might have had something to do with it.
In view of so many different interpretations and alternate counts, it would seem that the disciples and practitioners are not always on the same page either, or that they are always hedging their bets. Maybe it is just me, but I don't see how that which reveals its true nature only in hindsight can be of much use for daily decision making, and therefore do not see it as worthy of investigation. However, I accept your observation that we will never be able to convince the other to change their position, but my invitation remains open nonetheless. You might even learn a thing or two...
I think it depends on where you subjectively place the peaks and valleys. Seems to me some are counted and some are ignored, depending on what result you are trying to achieve. I say "subjective" because those would be influenced by the biases of the counter. The only thing my system tries to achieve is the highest results, within the constraints of consistency in all types of markets, i.e. don't skew the system settings trying to achieve "balanced" annual returns when it is the variations in market volatility that are primarily responsible. In other words, some years offer significantly more opportunities for gain than others. 2008 was such a year. A properly constructed backtest regime can reveal that in a heartbeat.
Also, did you note my invitation?
The NDX has morphed from an upchannel into a narrow rising wedge with an apex still a couple of months off. It would take another down day of yesterday's magnitude, *without* the bounce, to arrive in the vicinity of the lower boundary of the wedge.
Yes, your memory is faulty. I have contributed numerous TA examples on occasions when I thought they might contribute something to the overall decision equation to the "incogniscientia", e.g. MACD slope rollovers, extraordinary P/C ratios, etc. Re: my system, are you sure you really want to know, or are you just humoring me while appearing to be interested for the benefit of the board? If the former, I will issue you a guest pass for GTMPC logon and you can examine it for yourself. I promise it is not all smoke and mirrors. The system doesn't use anything but the market data itself and historical empirical statistics (i.e. what systems settings produced the better returns in the past under similar if not precisely the same conditions) to determine the "best" position on a day-to-day basis. *Backtested* and optimized over every single trading day since 1/1/2003, trading just once a day at either EOD or NDO as indicated, the current algorithm has an 82.89% win rate in the Long position and a 73.71% win rate in the Short position, which translates an initial $25,000 investment into $575,542,445,317.28 at today's closing price, exclusive of commissions and "trader slippage" (i.e. you just couldn't make the trade, which, I submit, will apply to most of us). In other words, your results will likely be less.
We have paying subscribers who have profited handsomely from the signal, so it would hardly be fair to them to reveal *all* our secrets to the general public on a continuing basis.
Yeah, his hubris is simply breathtaking.
I can always find something to change in my system that would have made a previously wrong signal right. Pretty amazing, huh?
Banned, for disagreeing too disagreeably.
He also has a very accurate characterization of the market's behavior the last several months, i.e. the grind to a marginal new high, a small pullback to confound and reset the OB indicators, and then another push up, which will likely continue until the Fed is forced to start deflating the liquidity bubble, and it is anyone's guess when that will be because they issue credit based on the Government's unlimited power to tax.
Good analysis of the real jobs/market story here...
http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc100111.htm
As I just posted on his board, even though he advertises otherwise, he does not deal with dissent very gracefully. Let's see if he deletes that post and/or bans me. The key to engaging and "tweaking" Poker is to take the high road and keep it subtle.
NQs soaring in the Sun eve session, up 7.5 to 1897.50...
It seems that your standard practice is to ban anyone who disagrees with you, which speaks more poorly of you than them. What, specifically, was your justification for banning MTar and MONGO?
You can engage Poker here if you want, but keep it civil. This post does not meet that standard. If you don't know the difference, then please stay away.
That's quite alright. I am sure he will see it. It really is laughable how he continually revises his count and then pretends it was right all along. Fundamentally, I am bearish also, because ultimately I don't think that out of control Government spending is the solution to this mess, but as long as the Fed keeps pumping money, the market will remain inflated. I think they are hoping that when they do start having to reduce the balance sheet and the deficit to save the dollar and the economy from total collapse that Joe Public will be ponying up his money to replace it. Whatever they tell you, *don't* move your 401k/IRA money into a Government-backed annuity.
NDX closed ~ 2.5 pts off a new high.
NDX is within ~ 3 pts of a new top...
Well, I hope you are right, because I am -2 NQH10 at 1884.
So much for the jobs report. Market doesn't seem to care...
An appropriate illustration of the issue would be a quantitative, TA-based system with a number of rules and indicators. As the indicator parameters are changed with the benefit of hindsight (i.e. the optimization of backtested results), you arrive at a set of parameters that is a better fit for the data than what you had previously, and while you may feel that the new parameter set should provide better results going forward, you can't claim any credit for it in the backtest because you didn't know what it was then. Just try calling up your broker and convincing him to give you credit for a trade that your system now says that it would have made if it knew then what it knows now.
My points exactly, but so much better and diplomatically presented. It is like there is always a correct count, but so often it does not reveal itself except in hindsight.
It would not surprise me at all if the market blows the jobs numbers off. After all, they got their positive number with the Nov revision.
Did you know that ahead of time, or in hindsight?
Except that they will no doubt be cooked under Obama lackey pressure.
Yeah, Cramer is an idiot, and no doubt, Long the market.
I dunno, Pokerman, but I don't think so. If the Fri jobs number is anything north of zero, it could spark a 300 pt Dow explosion to the upside. Had some decent volume today for a change, but the bears couldn't manage to do much more than break even, and NDX was down ~ 6 and is already coming back AH. Big whoop...
If it exists at all, which I seriously doubt, clairvoyance is unreliable at best, so I think I'll stick with math, statistics, and the empirical data.
What I continue to be befuddled about is how the waves know *in advance* what the market will do, whether your reference is grand super cyles or minuettes. Also, why is it that when the market violates the current count, is it automatically assumed that some other count must have been the "real" one?
Not sure what the equivalent NDX levels are, but the lower channel trend line is now ~ 1820, or ~ 65 pts lower (~ -3.45%). Until that is clearly violated, the uptrend remains intact.
From a purely technical perspective, the slope (first derivative for you math types) of the MACD(10,66) is beginning to roll-over, which is normally a reliable sign that this run is just about exhausted.