JimQ, a few times last year, you sent me (privately) predictions that failed to materialize. In fact, some were quite incorrect. I said nothing at the time, but simply noted the facts.
The odds are 50/50. Using just about any method or analysis (including flipping a coin), I can make it appear that I know something. Especially if I keep some ready excuses to explain the times I'm incorrect. For example, I flip my coin and say, heads means the market will hit a cycle top by February 14 (then add, but sometimes my cycle reverses and gives the opposite result, so it could be a cycle low). Well, now I've covered my bases, and I will appear right either way. Other creative explanations include cycle straddles, pseudo-trends, market exuberance, overdone selloff, market anomaly. Just pull out the words that make it appear you know something when the market action varies from your theory.
This is important stuff, and any good scientist knows it. Language is so deceptive it can fool the guy using it.
Nearly a year ago, I made some outrageous claims about my ability to read the market using the simplest possible method. My stats are backing up the claim, and interestingly, most of the best minds seems to ignore it. Hmmm. Just what is going on? I'm curious.
Ted
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
