patrick.net

Most people know nothing about knowledge. Yet they must hold on to something for emotional comfort. Luckily, knowledge on others' false knowledge can be profitable.

Graybox says

It don't matter to me if they are closing their short positions or buying it all means the same.

Shouldn't it matter? People acting out of pain are highly motivated and they tend to be in a hurry. :-)

Any trading methodologies once made public no longer work properly. Some would front-run it, some would manipulate prices to make it look like bearish/bullish, ... Kind of like Schrodinger's Cat phenomenon.

hanera says

Any trading methodologies once made public no longer work properly. Some would front-run it, some would manipulate prices to make it look like bearish/bullish, ... Kind of like Schrodinger's Cat phenomenon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest

Graybox says

darlag says

Dow Jones Industrial Average -- weekly update --

Markets will continue downtrend

http://patrick.net/?p=1276080

Statements like this just affirms my disregard for EW theory which I think the statement speaks for itself. (will)

I have no problem with skeptics. However, criticizing a subject about which one knows absolutely nothing adds no credibility to the opinion of the critic. On the contrary, it makes them look ignorantly biased.

EWT is a probabilistic tool that works incredibly well for those that take the time to learn and study it. Naturally it doesn't help someone who doesn't. Saying it is not credible doesn't make it so.

hanera says

Any trading methodologies once made public no longer work properly.

That is an EMH point of view. Socionomics discredits EMH and thus that argument.

darlag says

hanera says

Any trading methodologies once made public no longer work properly.

That is an EMH point of view. Socionomics discredits EMH and thus that argument.

That doesn't mean the market is not *somewhat* efficient.

On the other hand, trading in general adds white noise to the time series, making it less predictable.

Graybox says

Don't take any of this personal because your contribution is minimal and I am really just rebutting the EW STORE front.

I am that site. And I don't hide the fact that I am EWI affiliate - read my affiliations tab. But I am not part of Elliott Wave International. I'm sure they barely know I exist. I also have Google Ads and a Fat Cow affiliation. I can assure you neither of them know I exist. I choose to generate revenue through affiliations over sponsored adds because I believe in the Elliott Wave Principle.

I do my best to inform and educate anyone interested in the theory. Those that aren't interested are free to ignore me. That you don't believe in the theory is fine with me. Buy I will reiterate, you know next to nothing about Elliott Wave Theory and are thus not qualified to criticize it from an informed position. You have the right to your opinion, but you don't have the right to denigrate mine. I would welcome an objective debate but it's obvious you don't have a depth of understanding sufficient to present an informed point of view. The link you provided is riddled with inaccuracies about Elliott Wave theory beginning with the very first line...

"The underlying premise of Elliott Wave theory is that human behavior—as manifested in the movement of the stock market—can be modeled as a series of discrete patterns that recur predictably."

Elliott waves are endogenously regulated by social mood, not human behavior. Elliott Waves aren't discrete patterns, they are robust fractals. Then he goes on to talk about mathematical models:

"We then ask ourselves if it is possible that these patterns can be modeled mathematically in the same way that other natural phenomena have been. "

The author goes on to dismiss the theory as erroneous because no mathematical formula supports it. That is a ridiculous claim. They are waves, easily recognized but complex in construction. You can no more model an Elliott wave than you can an ocean wave. The principle is the same. They are both robust fractals. But the author apparently has no clue what fractal geometry is about. If he does then he is just being disingenuous. Hinging his argument on Input Identity, Existence and Degree is a meaningless exercise and only serves to prove he has absolutely zero understanding of the concept.

That you took offense to my assertion that markets will continue the downtrend is odd to me. I just count the waves and report the best set of probabilities as any type of market technician would do. The wave structure currently indicates the likely continuation of the decline so that is what I reported. CNBC is full of analysts everyday expressing market opinions with far less evidence that they know what they are talking about than I present.

I truly don't mind you expressing your opinion that EWT is some kind of junk voodoo pseudo-science. But don't try to pretend that you understand it well enough to criticize it with authority. You don't.

Graybox says

On the other hand I will absolutely "stand down" and have no desire to get in the way of a man generating revenue for himself and/or his family.

The site is more of a hobby for me than an income source. Warren Buffet is in no danger from my meager revenue. I do it because I enjoy it and believe it serves a purpose.

I don't ask you to stand down. I am all about healthy discussions that promote education and knowledge. I am not about dismissing someones ideas just because I have a feeling they are bogus, however. Please feel free to ask questions, challenge me or the theory, or state your own opinions. I just ask that you do it specifically and not in one broad stroke that dismisses the entire theory in one prejudiced swipe.

Time to go play golf... there are perks to living in sunny Florida.