nlightn:
Nice story. And, of course, it makes the point that no "tool" is perfect. Obviously no tool is perfect. If it was, everybody would know it and everybody would do it and everybody would be rich.
But, the flaw in your analogy is that that exact situation would not have occurred on its own. It only happened (if it happened at all) because someone was trying to prove it could. In the real trading world, resistance and support levels are very meaningful for the simple reason that people believe in them. If I, and thousands of others, believe that a stock will drop after hitting resistance, then it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy to a degree. When you take a big chunk of potential buyers out of the equation at any given moment, it skews the chart in favor of the direction that those buyers (or sellers) believe. Still, if you are right just 65% of the time on charting, you are a genius because 65% would give you a massive edge (tool).
The problem that all non TA people have is that they think it is supposed to work 100% of the time or it is no good. FA only works 51% of the time, but you don't hear people complaining about it. The only thing that works better than good TA is II (Inside Information). That works great all the time and is vastly more widespread than anyone imagines (except those doing it) IMO.
As to INTC, you rarely lose by staying on the sidelines when something is grossly overextended! If you short it, that might be a different matter. But, I rarely short. I just stay in cash when I don't like the direction of the markets. Anybody buying any stock in history on what would be the 13th consecutive up day is a LOSER. They may luck out tomorrow, but on average, they will get killed. A fool and his money will soon be parted.
Len
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
