Esoteric Methods

[SOCRATES]

Socrates,

re: combinations / keys etc.

I dont want to misinterpret your post, but the implication is that there is ONLY ONE combination, or ONLY ONE key.

I am sure that there are many styles of trading which result in profit, each with their respective downsides.

There has to be many combinations and many keys that fit this safe / lock ?

I have just seen this:~

You can try shouting "Open Sesame ! " , very loud.........but I very much doubt if it will work.
Many people are doing the same thing, though....

 

[Splitlink]

I have just seen this:~

You can try shouting "Open Sesame ! " , very loud.........but I very much doubt if it will work.
Many people are doing the same thing, though....

I've said it before and say it again- this is a numbers game.

Most people get frightened of their trading style and change, which is fatal, without a good reason, because to where one changes also has to be given a period of time to succeed.

So, "Open Sesame !" may not work all the time but, if it has worked for a satisfactory number of times over a period of backtesting (no need to go back years for this- six months is more than enough- even three) then there is no reason why it should not work in the future.

Chopping and changing systems is the trader's worst enemy, along with the correct placing of stop losses.

I'm still working on your advice, by the way. Took a nasty fall last week which offset the several gains that I had made previously, I almost gave it up but, fortunately for the Easter break, I am decided to keep at it.

Split

 

[Trdr]

For me esoteric would be trading based on astrology.

See post #436 for EW pdf:
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showthread.php?t=11590&page=44&pp=10

 

[peterpr]

- Post #31.
The market does not respect opinions.
The market only respects views, the correct views. I will add that an opinion is a view tainted by emotion.
Again, the market does not respect emotions etc...

To talk in terms of what the market respects is to endow it with intelligence - to anthropomorphise it. That's not to say such analogies do not have their uses. But that is all they are - analogies with consequent limitations and distortions.

In reality, I doubt 'the market' respects anything. It is as capable of respect as it is of disrespect - or love, hate, hope, fear etc and it is no doubt possible to use all those analogies to convey insights into its 'mysteries' as well.

Personally I don't find it useful to regard the markets as mysterious at all - any more than I find it useful in the daily grind to regard people as mysterious - although in the context of philosophising they undoubtedly are.

IMHO the pre-requisites for trading success are, in no particular order:

Understanding the nature and mechanics of the markets you intend to trade
Understanding the nature of the instruments you intend to trade
Understanding the principles underlying any indicators/methods you itend to use, together with their limitations.
Understanding risk/reward - particularly in relation to gearing
understanding the components of a trade - entry, management and exit.
Iron self discipline

It's then a question of equiping yourself with the tools of the trade and developing/testing your own trading systems/methods.

Some will follow a mentor (Guru?) and there may well be some damn good ones around willing to 'impart the mysteries' so to speak, - either selflessly, or for a fee. My own view is that successful trading demands a high degree of individualistic self-reliance and independence of spirit. Such attributes hardly accord with surrender to a craft that requires submission to degrees of initiation by the masters.

Although when you consider the 'Bones' brotherhood of both Sen. Kerry and Dubya (plus a high proportion of the US elite it seems), you do have to wonder

As for 'esoteric' indicators - there are thousands of them. Again, personally I do not regard either Fib and/or EW analysis as particularly esoteric. They are pretty main stream really and have become so because of demonstrable trading usefulness

 

[SOCRATES]

You don't get my drift at all ~ and then suddenly, unexpectedly, you answer your own questions, but you do not grab the fact that you succeed in misdirecting yourself first. I am not explaining this any further because it only leads to argument for the sake of it. All of it is obvious, but not in the way you percieve it.

 

[Splitlink]

For me esoteric would be trading based on astrology.

See post #436 for EW pdf:
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showthread.php?t=11590&page=44&pp=10

So you use the Fidinacci lines for predicting a year in advance? What about the trend line, when did you decide to draw that in? Because I found that they are very hindsightish. Even the yearly ones change from up to down in a very short period of time and the peaks do not always pierce the channels until long afterwards, when it is all history. Also, when it does pierce the channel on the latest day, quite often the trend is changing and you should be selling, instead of buying.

I decided to chuck indicators out of the window for those reasons, although I do take notice of certain patterns, for instance, that lovely double bottom on your chart. That would have been enough for me.

Split

 

[peterpr]

You don't get my drift at all ~ and then suddenly, unexpectedly, you answer your own questions, but you do not grab the fact that you succeed in misdirecting yourself first. I am not explaining this any further because it only leads to argument for the sake of it. All of it is obvious, but not in the way you percieve it.

Hey, I'm not seeking confrontation, or 'argument for the sake of it'

I simply offered an opinion about the requirements for trading success which were relevant to the questions posed by the thread starter and other matters expressed elsewhere in the thread. It was an opinion based on experience - as in legal or scientific 'opinion'. Granted it involved a critique of 'market as intelligent entity' which, even if it 'missed your drift', hopefully added something to the sum of knowledge. What it did not do was answer my own questions since I didn't pose any.

 

[SOCRATES]

You do not grab my drift because you are succumbing to the temptation to bring back the discussion to basic mechanical common sense which is a prerequisite for anyone to have any measure of success.
We have discussed all these things in other threads before, one by one, ad nauseam. It is all mainstream. I concede that even what you mention, which is rock bottom basic, is already very heavy duty for most people to master. But none of it is esoteric.

Here is an example of what is esoteric:~

"To wonder is to ask a question in abstraction without actually asking it."

Oh, by the way there is no fee or otherwise, as I am not willing to impart any mysteries to anyone. I am only interested in discussing mysteries with others well versed in mysteries of their own which share or occupy likeminded territories.

 

[a320]

" but we will speak only of those things which are difficult, and not to be grasped by the senses,but indeed,which are amost contarary to the evidence of the senses"

For all that meet the bodily sense I deem Symbolical, and one mightly alphabet for infant Minds:and we in this low world placed with our backs to bright Reality, That we may learn with young unwounded Ken The substance from the Shadow.

 

[TheBramble]

Colridge on an estoerics thread...well I never!!!!

 

[a320]

& Paracelsus....

 

[TheBramble]

Here is an example of what is esoteric:~

"To wonder is to ask a question in abstraction without actually asking it."

Which is not esoteric at all, unless you are asking us to consider who it is that sets us this example and who is it that considers it.

To wonder is to journey one's way along a string of inductive and deductive processes which move in and out of abstraction. Nothing esoteric about it.

Unless you are asking us to think about who it is that 'takes the journey'...and then you are on the right track for this thread.

But who would have thought you to be a student of Blavatsky. You do surprise Bertie.

 

[a320]

Alberts style is some what remenisent of beelzebub.... :?:

 

[SOCRATES]

Which is not esoteric at all, unless you are asking us to consider who it is that sets us this example and who is it that considers it.

To wonder is to journey one's way along a string of inductive and deductive processes which move in and out of abstraction. Nothing esoteric about it.

Unless you are asking us to think about who it is that 'takes the journey'...and then you are on the right track for this thread.

But who would have thought you to be a student of Blavatsky. You do surprise Bertie.

I am surprised at you Bramble, since you are so good at cryptics, that you miss it and it is right in front of you, plain for all to see, nothing to do with Blavatsky at all.

 

[a320]

That's absolutely the most subliminal chart I've ever seen...

SC on your tail?

This one seems familiar as well...:?: Fib grid with fib bar counts... hmmm could it be a matrix...

 

[Trdr]

Hello Splitlink, the charting program is MetaStock using the Standard Error Channel. The SEC is my main tool along with the fibo price levels tool, and used because of its simplicity and ease of readjustment, pivoting as it does from its start point fulcrum. The SEC default settings are Close (H/L) and 2 Units. Blue SECs 1, 2, 3 are all drawn from the same start bar Wk 10/11/02, illustrating that one SEC can be drawn and often, but not always, remain in use and adjusted as the price progresses, definitely not 'hindsightish'.

The inner Blue SECs are 4 Copy/Pastes of the original SEC (sometimes not pasting precisely so over-draw original) and changed to Units 2.5, 1.5, 1 and .5 respectively. First Blue arrow is where the SEC adjustment node is located, down Blue arrow the point where the SEC is aligned. Any value such as fibonacci ratios can be entered in Units.

The Red fibo has been 'stepped' from what's considered to be the HL of Wave 0/1 Wks 3/17/00 - 10/2000; what's interesting is how the price appears to interact with those fibo levels even tho the price movement is upward.

Second chart illustrates the use of Advanced Get's Pitchfork which has 7 built-in user defined parallel lines. I don't use the Pitchfork in either program since I find it requires too much readjustment, sometimes deletion and redrawing to place correctly on the price movement.

Third chart illustrates the angled fibo price levels tool in MetaTrader 4 beta – tho not drawn accurately.

Happy Easter everyone.

 

[Splitlink]

Hello Splitlink, the charting program is MetaStock using the Standard Error Channel. The SEC is my main tool along with the fibo price levels tool, and used because of its simplicity and ease of readjustment, pivoting as it does from its start point fulcrum. The SEC default settings are Close (H/L) and 2 Units. Blue SECs 1, 2, 3 are all drawn from the same start bar Wk 10/11/02, illustrating that one SEC can be drawn and often, but not always, remain in use and adjusted as the price progresses, definitely not 'hindsightish'.
.

I appreciate you showing us your charts. I do not think that I could work with so many lines, which is the good thing about TA i.e. we all read the charts differently

Regards

Split

 

[Trdr]

No Split, I don't use all those lines, just a couple of sets moved once the price hits, but I do like seeing the price cut when it's topped or bottomed.

 

[TheBramble]

This one seems familiar as well...:?: Fib grid with fib bar counts... hmmm could it be a matrix...

Can't see the wood for the trees....

 

[spunkyblonde]

i love this bull market