News Focus
News Focus
icon url

rafunrafun

10/27/17 10:15 PM

#116990 RE: HDGabor #116989

Well I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that he did not use TA when he made the $.68 prediction.

People lie, people have ulterior motifs.

Yes I'm not a TA expert but I know BS when I see it. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that someone with less than 10% correct track record is full of crap.
icon url

jessellivermore

10/28/17 8:42 AM

#116996 RE: HDGabor #116989

G...

Quote: " As I know: yes. (more correctly: based on the same available data)."

As far as I know TA is not a specific method, but rather it is an idea. The idea is that future prices can be predicted from available data (price charts and volumes)...And that these predictions can be made independently from fundamentals such as earnings and events...

What comes next is a bewildering array of differing methods which include market cycles, chart patterns such as "cup and handle", head and shoulders" specific price actions such as "one day reversals"..."double tops"..."dogis", breakouts, breakouts from bands, and so on and so one....

So in many ways TA is closer to oil painting than to pure math..Some like William O'Neil have used TA like Rembrandt..(though O'Neil always backed up his patterns with fundamentals)...But I think we have no Rembrandts on this board and bad TA is like rotten fish.

":>) JL