Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

MadMarketScientist

Advice for All - Stop Fighting the Trend!

Recommended Posts

yes - where it starts where it stops and where you are at any one particular time depends on the person and as clmacdougall says - bias, context and trend.

 

Elliot wave for me works best when it presents itself......you can often see 5 clear waves in something with a clear 3rd wave.....that is a clear alert for me the trend for those waves might be tiring..... but I never try and count the waves....I let them appear.

 

I think you just gave a clear definition of a "pseudoscience." Something that subjectively is clear to you but is impossible to make a true predictive study of.

As long as it works for you!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i would never claim trading is scientific because it is exactly that - subjective. Each persons view differs in many respects....hence why when people ask - give me something that works.....just does not work.

Most systems only work some of the time - hence its certainly not science.

Thats also why I dont try to count things like elliot wave - but to me when I see things like a 50% pullback in what I think is a retracement rally in an uptrend, and we have not done what I could see to be 5 waves, etc; etc; then it seems a pretty good bet that some of the pseudoscience might actually give me some odds the trend might continue....an if it does not, then i stop out.

It can work for everyone :) in some form - it just may not work for a computer. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Then one day it hit me – there is not one Elliott Wave pattern (and how it unfolds for real instead of the way it’s ‘supposed’ to) that can not be fully comprehended via the Summation of Cycles principle…

 

I am no Elliotician (though have a decent grasp of the principles). One thing that occurred to me when I looked at it is that he did not select the smallest building block to base all his stuff on. If you re-start everything with a more appropriate smaller 'wavelet' 'block' you can pretty much model price in a consistent fashion without having all the special rules and cases that EW requires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes - where it starts where it stops and where you are at any one particular time depends on the person and as clmacdougall says - bias, context and trend.

 

Elliot wave for me works best when it presents itself......you can often see 5 clear waves in something with a clear 3rd wave.....that is a clear alert for me the trend for those waves might be tiring..... but I never try and count the waves....I let them appear.

 

SIUYA,

 

This looked more like a reply to Response #144 at

Trading Chaos by Bill Williams - Page 2 | Trade2Win Forums

than to "Then one day it hit me ..."

 

:confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... the smallest building block to base all his stuff on. If you re-start everything with a more appropriate smaller 'wavelet' 'block' you can pretty much model price in a consistent fashion without having all the special rules and cases that EW requires.

 

BF, Interesting...thx

Ok, I'll bite :) -

what does the smallest building block / wavelet look like?

zdo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered if anyone would (bite). If you break an impulse into 2 you get essentially an ABCD type formation An impulse wave now becomes two 'bullish' ABCD's in a row and a correction is a single bearish ABCD. Image attached ,,,marvel at my paint skills :)

 

I just think that these building blocks are much more flexible (though you might loose some predictive aspects).

Untitled.png.8619d66c72719adee588d29f3c993b0b.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SIUYA,

 

This looked more like a reply to Response #144 at

Trading Chaos by Bill Williams - Page 2 | Trade2Win Forums

than to "Then one day it hit me ..."

 

:confused:

 

I kind of have then become confused with what you are talking about here and/or there (as I dont frequent t2w?

 

Our points seem to be the same.... As EW can occur everywhere and it can be seen however we like....for me I dont overcomplicate it as I also dont think there is one EW pattern, but if combined with context and the trend, and I see what I would see as a EW 5 wave pattern in the time frame I am looking at then it helps keep me out of a few poor entries. I dont delve down into trying to perfect the entry - it just keeps me out of some duds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good seed of thought for K'NEX master builders. Fractal. bridge ideas to inspire.

Incorporate Golden ratio. All the trend line will make sense.

 

Thanks.

:)

 

 

Ref:

BlowFish

 

I wondered if anyone would (bite). If you break an impulse into 2 you get essentially an ABCD type formation An impulse wave now becomes two 'bullish' ABCD's in a row and a correction is a single bearish ABCD. Image attached ,,,marvel at my paint skills

 

I just think that these building blocks are much more flexible (though you might loose some predictive aspects).

Attached Thumbnails

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BF,

 

re: "...An impulse wave now becomes two 'bullish' ABCD's in a row... "

How do you find the demarcation btwn the two 'bullish' ABCD's ?

 

thx

 

zdo

 

ps Maybe we should move this conversation to a new 'Most basic building blocks' thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should say I did not go so far as to construct a formal framework around the observation. It was pretty much just that...an observation. I guess you would start looking for continuation into a second bullish wavelet or a corrective bearish wavelet when AB=CD. I guess all the time C 'holds' (and if the context/trend/whatever supports it) you would anticipate another bullish wavelet.

 

Of course the trouble with all this there are smaller magnitude 'wavelets' all over the place. I do think if one was to provide a bit of rigour and a few formal 'rules' you could come up with a decent framework.

 

Clyde Lee (rip) did a lot of work with swings at theswingmachine. His approach was statistical in nature if you get this sequence of ABCD's what is the probability for the next one. It was interesting work. Sadly his site has gone to a golf company since his death. Way back machine archive is offline right now too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.