Techcharter--Do you know what your stats are with e-wave? Hard, scientific count. Market calls, trades. Truth. I haven't seen anyone hitting above 60 percent accuracy. If the stats are not hitting above 60 percent consistently, then no true insight is occurring because mysticalball.com can also hit 60 percent accuracy during a run of 100 questions.
Another important issue: If the market is strongly trending up (e.g., 2003 to 2007), it is possible to win big using a variety of methods and then believe it's the method. Maybe it had nothing to do with the method. Tricky stuff.
Completely agree with the scientific method comment.
Here's the awesome part of my method. It can't fail. And we absolutely can know it's the method producing the result. It has no built-in flaws. Absolute truth. You'll soon see. Ask me questions until it becomes completely clear. It's simple, subtle, practical. It's because of certain laws of price around the ma's. Yes, laws of price, like the law of gravity. That clear, that reliable. No one saw gravity before Newton, and then, we saw it everywhere. Oh yeah, gravity.
The only failure points would be small percentage losses on false signals--or sudden market reversals. I've been able to fine-tune entry points so false signals are rare, and this is an area for continuous improvement. Some market phases are easier than others too.
As far as sudden market reversals go, many can be avoided. They are actually relatively rare, and if a trader is winning consistently, a one-time setback can be sustained without too much grief.
Thanks for writing.
Double
PS to the Board:
As excited as I am by all this, trading and investing can be a slow and dreary business. It takes time to see things set up, follow through and end.
I saw Eureka's message above. He's absolutely right. Nearly all stocks trade with the major market. So everything I have to say is contained in the $SPX, $NYA, and $VLE. That's really all I need do--focus on that. You can look at any stock from GE to IBM to XOHO and see a similar pattern.
As far as getting my theory across, I really will need to use words. There are certain laws of price and certain assumptions that can *only* be explained in language. Very funny. Perhaps it's why I see it--I see it through language, through a philosophical understanding of price. The visuals are absolutely there in the chart, but the interpretation must be understood through language! At least I think this is the case. I'll think about how best to get my views across.
I'll do everything I can to be as brief as possible. I want everyone winning with as little input from me as possible.
I have every intention of bringing the glory days back. And in honor of Cash and Airedale. You will clearly notice Airedale's influence on my work. It is no accident whatsoever I'm here. None at all.
AI
