You Have Been Setup to Fail As a Trader!

[PristineTrading 10]

When I began learning about the trading using technical analysis over 20-years ago I filtered through much of the same information you are. I examined the use of trendlines, moving averages, countless indicators and other types of technical measures. All of which were supposed to define a trend, signal changes of a trend or turning points within those trends. What I found is that nothing worked with any consistently and there were too many variables. Especially flawed are the concepts of overbought and oversold, which I will convince you of.

 

Whether you are a stock, commodity or currency trader, at some point you have been lead to believe that by using price oscillators like Stochastic, RSI, Williams %r or the many others you will be able to determine turning points in those tradable instruments. The idea with these is that they can measure the price action and determine when those prices have become overbought (moved too high) or oversold (moved too low). When a signal is given prices will then reverse.

 

Once you've learned this and their ability to signal turns has been instilled in your beliefs of what is possible, you have been setup to fail. It's not your fault since those that teach the use of these indicators in trading courses will show you how well they worked in the past. Of course, real-time experience will show you how often it doesn't work. Let's look at a couple of examples

 

Before we do that, if you have not read the article I wrote called Bringing Common Sense to Trading. In it you will learn how to trade prices action that has moved too far too fast.

 

 

In the above chart of Google (GOOG), once prices began their move higher there weren't any pullbacks of significance. While conventional thinking would suggest that prices would or should pullback it didn't happen. You see, overbought is a flawed concept that does work and it will limit what you believe is possible. There is a meaning to the word of course, but it has no real existence in the markets. When buyers are in control and there is little to no price resistance to the left prices can move higher and higher regardless of the overbought belief. It is obvious from the chart above, what is overbought can become more overbought and then move even higher.

 

 

If you still have any doubt that the idea of overbought or oversold is flawed, this chart should take care of it. As Research in Motion (RIMM) started its decline there was never a point where it was overbought within the decline, which is still intact. I know that we can make some oscillator with some setting show an overbought signal at the Pristine Sell Setup (PSS). However, that would setup another limiting belief that it may work in the future or on another stock or currency. FA Get About It.

 

At this point, RIMM could be oversold at zero, but look at this chart. From the high, it fell 20 points and no bounce and then another 20 and nothing. It fell about 50 points before being able to move up and form that PSS! Is that when some oscillator read oversold? There is no oversold or that it has moved too far lower when big money institutions are overloaded and caught. In addition, when there is no significant price support to the left (a Pristine Price Void), the odds are extremely high that the decline is going to continue until the Void is closed.

 

If you are reading this you are passionate to learn about trading and failure is not an option. You are in search of the truth in technical analysis; same as I was. I found it and it isn't in the accepted, over-taught indicator based methods. The truth is in keeping it simple and understanding the messages within the price action. This is the same for day-trading, swing-trading or long-term investing and the same for FOREX, Stocks or E-minis.

 

If you have a trading screen full of indicators I am sure that you have been affected by the plague that infects everyone wanting to learn trading based on chart reading. Consider what I've shown you and remove them, read my other article Bringing Common Sense to Trading and the light will start to come on.

 

All the best,

 

 

Greg Capra

President & CEO

Pristine Capital Holdings, Inc.

[bobcollett 10]

Hi Greg

Would you include Volume as an indicator?

regards

bobc

[Adrian 10]

It is easy to show big trends in the PAST, where OB/OS indicators seemingly fail, but the reality is that it simply isn't true. The FACTS are that despite what you might hear from a firm that heavily markets trading courses at fairly high prices, and teaching incredibly basic stuff, the FACTS are that the two trends above can be perfectly defined by the use of OB/OS oscillators if one uses some lateral thinking. And one can quite easily get on board also via the same OB/OS indicators and ride the tend quite nicely. The big difference is that when, in the vast majority of cases, these big trends don't take place for most markets, the use of OB/OS oscillators will absolutely kill any traditional basic trend following approach.

 

So the lesson is, don't always believe what you read, and especially so when coming from a person who also happens to sell trading courses.

 

I don't market anything, but simply make comments based on 30 years experience. Is 30 > 20? Does it mean anything? Who knows. LOL

[tommot 10]

The intent and outline of the brief article is sound enough. It's just that his English is unclear. Depending on spell checkers is no help for errors of context or simply saying the opposite of what is meant. A copy reader would probably pick up the errors and a kindly reader would ignore them. A sloppy reader, unfortunately, would assume the writer means what the text states. And that would be unfortunate.

From the context the author appears to be an English native speaker. If he's not, then I would not like to be harsh, though even then the text should go past a sense checker.

Examples:

"When I began learning about the trading using technical analysis over 20-years ago I filtered through much of the same information you are."

"Before we do that, if you have not read the article I wrote called Bringing Common Sense to Trading. In it you will learn how to trade prices action that has moved too far too fast."

"In the above chart of Google (GOOG), once prices began their move higher there weren't any pullbacks of significance. While conventional thinking would suggest that prices would or should pullback it didn't happen. You see, overbought is a flawed concept that does work and it will limit what you believe is possible."

By sloppy writing, the intent is lost. Omitting a "not" is no help on the road to enlightenment.

And just as an aside, the "overbought" and "oversold" indicators are not usually assumed to be trustworthy on their own, needing confirmation. A stock can be oversold achingly long and overbought seemingly forever. The slopes of hope stretch to infinity and the wall of worry has no limits...our cash and patience do.

[kuokam 10]

Where are the failed oscillators on the charts?

 

 

It is easy to show big trends in the PAST, where OB/OS indicators seemingly fail, but the reality is that it simply isn't true. The FACTS are that despite what you might hear from a firm that heavily markets trading courses at fairly high prices, and teaching incredibly basic stuff, the FACTS are that the two trends above can be perfectly defined by the use of OB/OS oscillators if one uses some lateral thinking. And one can quite easily get on board also via the same OB/OS indicators and ride the tend quite nicely. The big difference is that when, in the vast majority of cases, these big trends don't take place for most markets, the use of OB/OS oscillators will absolutely kill any traditional basic trend following approach.

 

So the lesson is, don't always believe what you read, and especially so when coming from a person who also happens to sell trading courses.

 

I don't market anything, but simply make comments based on 30 years experience. Is 30 > 20? Does it mean anything? Who knows. LOL

[Greg Capra 10]

Hi Greg

Would you include Volume as an indicator?

regards

bobc

 

Bobcollet, volume isn't an indicator like MACD and alike that attempts to intepert the direction or tuning points of the price action. Volume tells us the magnatude of interest at the time or the lack thereof.

 

So volume is a secondary piece of information in addition to price, not an indicator. Of course, there are volume indicators like On Balance Volume. Like price indicators, volume indicators are redundate. Looking at a simple chart with price and volume is enough.

 

Greg

[MightyMouse 12]

Bobcollet, volume isn't an indicator like MACD and alike that attempts to intepert the direction or tuning points of the price action. Volume tells us the magnatude of interest at the time or the lack thereof.

 

So volume is a secondary piece of information in addition to price, not an indicator. Of course, there are volume indicators like On Balance Volume. Like price indicators, volume indicators are redundate. Looking at a simple chart with price and volume is enough.

 

Greg

 

Volume isn't an indicator like MACD, but it is an indicator that can be used nonetheless, as can price and time.

[BlueHorseshoe 10]

Especially flawed are the concepts of overbought and oversold, which I will convince you of.

 

Greg, all your article has suceeded in doing here is demonstrating that you have little idea of what you're talking about . . .

 

On the chart you show GOOG is clearly in an uptrend (whether you use MAs, trendlines, swing charting - nobody would really argue with this), so why on earth would you try and use an OB reading to short it, hmm?

 

What you need to do is use an OS reading to BUY THE PULLBACKS. I've marked these on a chart below, along with failed rallies in a downtrend, which is where you short on OB. You'll also need an oscillator with a responsive setting - a 2-Period RSI or a 6-Period CCI, for instance.

 

There you go - you just learned how to use oscillators to trade with the trend - and I didn't charge you a thing!

 

Regards,

 

BlueHorseshoe

[Tradewinds 12]

It's very difficult to determine when price will turn in the opposite direction. If if were easy, everyone would get into trading, and everyone would make money. It's like a casino; if everyone made money at the casino, they would be open for one day, then go out of business, or quickly find a way to put the odds overwhelmingly in their favor.

 

Price moves very quickly to new levels, making it difficult to react in time. This leaves the trader with two basic choices:

 

• Enter an order at a target price in advance, and hope for the best.
  
• Try to time the order point, and hope you can react fast enough.
  

 

Both choices have serious flaws, putting the trader at a severe disadvantage no matter what you do. If price always moved very slowly, that could be seen as a lack of opportunity to the trader. In order to make money, there needs to be price movement. So either way, there are disadvantages. If price moves fast, it poses challenges. If price moves very slow, there is less opportunity within that time frame.

 

So what's the better choice? Try to enter orders very quickly, or guess at target levels and enter the order in advance?

 

It was pointed out that the price pauses after each price level, and at that point a decision needs to be made. During that price pause, there is plenty of time to exit, lock in profit, and try to decide if the trend will continue or not.

 

If you exit, and re-enter in the same direction, then the trade goes against you, at least you've locked in some profit. You may loose money on the next trade, but hopefully, overall you won't loose. If you can somehow break even on the bad trades, or not loose to much, that's half the battle.

 

If you react too fast, and get a bad entry, then a fast reaction time is not an advantage. A fast reaction can be either bad or good. If you try to act very fast, but fail to analyze the situation because you didn't have enough time, it's basically just trading randomly. You might get lucky, you might not.

 

No matter what perspective you take in your strategy, there are advantages and disadvantages. Good decisions need to be made that put the odds in your favor. I'm not saying that I do that. I'm speaking from experiencing and knowing how stupid I can be.

 

One mistake I make, is that I take profit, then immediately get back in a position at a better price without having time to analyze whether it was a good decision or not. Locking in the profit, and getting back in at a better price isn't the mistake, that's fine. The problem is that I'm just 'Rolling the Dice', acting on a hunch, and taking a chance. Later, I can look at my charts and see what I should have done, but I have the luxury of time 'after the fact'.

 

I need to take advantage of those sideways price pauses as a way to have enough time to make a good decision.

[DbPhoenix 42]

I've been hoping that someone would post one of these oscillators and explain how it/they would tell you what to do or not do in real time. Absent that, there's no advantage over a simple diagonal line, so why bother?

 

Db

[DbPhoenix 42]

Volume isn't an indicator like MACD, but it is an indicator that can be used nonetheless, as can price and time.

 

Neither volume nor price are indicators in the traditionally-accepted technical analysis definition of "indicator". Volume and price exist outside the trader. They require no settings. They require no calculations. They do not owe their existence to a formula. Price "indicates" that a transaction has taken place. Volume "indicates" how many. This does not make them "indicators" as the term is normally used by a trader.

 

Db

[BlueHorseshoe 10]

I've been hoping that someone would post one of these oscillators and explain how it/they would tell you what to do or not do in real time. Absent that, there's no advantage over a simple diagonal line, so why bother?

 

Db

 

Hi Db,

 

My post above explains one way in which oscillators can be helpful. I suspect that the reason you don't pull up a chart and look at this yourself is that you've already decided that this sort of thing doesn't work . . .

 

As for realtime - when I traded like this and tried to discuss a position with you in real time earlier this year, you didn't seem too interested.

 

The chart below shows what happens when something like this works out well. If the trend is up buy OS pullbacks, if the trend is down sell OB rallies. If you can do this without an oscillator to define OB/OS or an indicator to define trend, then that's all good too.

 

BlueHorseshoe

[DbPhoenix 42]

Hi Db,

 

My post above explains one way in which oscillators can be helpful. I suspect that the reason you don't pull up a chart and look at this yourself is that you've already decided that this sort of thing doesn't work . . .

 

I don't pull up a chart and look at this myself because I'm interested in how those who claim that oscillators work so well in RT use them. It's one thing to say OSCILLATORS WORK and another to apply one to a chart and show how it would work.

 

As for realtime - when I traded like this and tried to discuss a position with you in real time earlier this year, you didn't seem too interested.

 

I wasn't uninterested, but it wasn't RT, nor was it a Wyckoff trade, so I saw no reason to pursue it.

 

The chart below shows what happens when something like this works out well. If the trend is up buy OS pullbacks, if the trend is down sell OB rallies. If you can do this without an oscillator to define OB/OS or an indicator to define trend, then that's all good too.

 

BlueHorseshoe

 

Or one could simply apply a demand line and make one entry at the beginning and one exit at the end. Without knowing the exact entries and exits using the oscillator, and the commission schedule, it's impossible to say which would the more profitable. But the once in-once out (without considering pyramiding) would be close to being as profitable and would carry only one commission. So what's the point of all that trading?

 

I don't see indicators as being the work of the devil. I just don't see the value of them.

 

Db

[DbPhoenix 42]

Since I've asked for chart examples, I ought to provide one.

 

The black area encircles the timeframe used in BH's chart. Limiting oneself to that, a suggested entry is provided (the hinge is noted for those who know what it is; it is similar to a coil). There is no exit or further entry until the trend "ends", at the break of the demand line. The one earlier break of the demand line in March could be a prompt for an exit, but one could re-enter immediately thereafter and continue riding the trend.

 

Db

 

 

 

[MightyMouse 12]

Neither volume nor price are indicators in the traditionally-accepted technical analysis definition of "indicator". Volume and price exist outside the trader. They require no settings. They require no calculations. They do not owe their existence to a formula. Price "indicates" that a transaction has taken place. Volume "indicates" how many. This does not make them "indicators" as the term is normally used by a trader.

 

Db

 

Wow! Deep! I will twist one up and read it again. Thanks.

[BlueHorseshoe 10]

Hi Db,

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

I don't pull up a chart and look at this myself because I'm interested in how those who claim that oscillators work so well in RT use them. It's one thing to say OSCILLATORS WORK and another to apply one to a chart and show how it would work.

 

I would argue that if one is trading completely mechanically then these two things are essentially the same. What's more, if I could show that something rule-based worked very consistently it wouldn't really matter whether I personally was able to trade it effectively (I could be a complete psychological wreck who screws everything up).

 

If you're really interested then surely you can follow what I describe in realtime on a chart - all you need to do is have a glance at the end of each day and note any entries or exits.

 

Since I've asked for chart examples, I ought to provide one.

 

The black area encircles the timeframe used in BH's chart. Limiting oneself to that, a suggested entry is provided (the hinge is noted for those who know what it is; it is similar to a coil). There is no exit or further entry until the trend "ends", at the break of the demand line. The one earlier break of the demand line in March could be a prompt for an exit, but one could re-enter immediately thereafter and continue riding the trend.

 

This is very effective here when the market trends clearer (exactly the same could be said for what my chart shows), and is obviously a much cleaner and more cost efficient way to trade. But what happens when the trend is less obvious and the market becomes "choppy"? The mean reverting tendency of the ES is very well documented, and easily test-able. My experience is that what you show (a form of breakout/trend following) breaks down more significantly in trendless markets than does trading pullbacks. This is because the OB/OS part is more forgiving when one judges the trend incorrectly. See the chart.

 

A good example of this is the trade we discussed in the Wykoff thread. With the benefit of hindsight, you called the trend correctly, I called it incorrectly (so much for MAs!). However, whether I took the long or the short signals during those couple of months didn't really matter - I would have made money either way. Times of trend change are when this approach most notably fails.

 

I'm not trying to encourage/discourage anyone from whatever works for them, and personally I would trade without any indicators to support trading decisions if I thought that I could; what I don't like is when people get up on a pedestal (like the OP) and condemn something as useless just because they don't understand how to use it.

 

BlueHorseshoe

Edited October 2, 2012 by BlueHorseshoe

[DbPhoenix 42]

I would argue that if one is trading completely mechanically then these two things are essentially the same. What's more, if I could show that something rule-based worked very consistently it wouldn't really matter whether I personally was able to trade it effectively (I could be a complete psychological wreck who screws everything up).

 

This position, however, is one of the chief criticisms of vendors, that they claim something is true without backing it up. Critics should be held to the same standard.

 

This is very effective here when the market trends clearer (exactly the same could be said for what my chart shows), and is obviously a much cleaner and more cost efficient way to trade. But what happens when the trend is less obvious and the market becomes "choppy"

 

None of this, however, is pertinent to the subject of the thread. The OP is addressing the usefulness/necessity of oscillators in trending markets, particularly with regard to the notions of overbought and oversold. You're the only participant to post a chart showing their potential usefulness. Whether or not they are in fact useful in real time, much less necessary, is another matter, and there are dozens of other threads that address this issue.

 

Db

[BlueHorseshoe 10]

The OP is addressing the usefulness/necessity of oscillators in trending markets, particularly with regard to the notions of overbought and oversold.

 

I disagree with this actually. I think the OP "cherry picks" trending markets to try and demonstrate the uselessness of such indicators when they are employed to try and pick tops and bottoms in longer term trends. I regard this as a mis-use of such indicators (or certainly one that defies common sense).

 

BlueHorseshoe

[DbPhoenix 42]

I think the OP "cherry picks" trending markets to try and demonstrate the uselessness of such indicators when they are employed to try and pick tops and bottoms in longer term trends. I regard this as a mis-use of such indicators (or certainly one that defies common sense).

 

So does the OP. Re-read his second and third paragraphs.

 

Db

[bobcollett 10]

Since I've asked for chart examples, I ought to provide one.

 

The black area encircles the timeframe used in BH's chart. Limiting oneself to that, a suggested entry is provided (the hinge is noted for those who know what it is; it is similar to a coil). There is no exit or further entry until the trend "ends", at the break of the demand line. The one earlier break of the demand line in March could be a prompt for an exit, but one could re-enter immediately thereafter and continue riding the trend.

 

Db

 

 

 

 

Hi Mr Horseshoes

Every morning I pray to Charty.He's the God of the trader.

And I ask for a nice trending chart like the second part of this chart.

And every day I get the first part , the choppy part.

You are correct..... cherry picking

kind regards

bobc

[Patuca 13]

[quote=DbPhoenix;162296 So what's the point of all that trading?

 

Db

its called compounding...

[Patuca 13]

why is everyone against picking the best cherries? they taste the best..why would a trader pick a half green cherry just to be statistically correct? all you have to do is have a mechanism that identifies the best cherries....

[Guest OILFXPRO]

why is everyone against picking the best cherries? they taste the best..why would a trader pick a half green cherry just to be statistically correct? all you have to do is have a mechanism that identifies the best cherries....

 

They give certainty to their beliefs , and believe it even more.