Quick question

[Mr. Charts]

False since charts show where price has been and is, and don't show current buy and sell pressures, news, external factors about to impinge on price and several other things.
To suggest "everything is in the price", "all is known in advance" and all the rest of those glib phrases is plain over-simplification and distortion.

 

[DashRiprock]

well compadre my overall thing is that I just don't believe that a graph alone is enough to make money by anything other than accident, but it gets like 90% of the attention because its the only tool that 90% of the people are using (hammer -> nail a la maslow).

 

[Doomberg]

Personally i used to prefer fundamentals so no

 

[fihunts]

For me, the charts give me the most information as I am pretty much a trend trader in Forex. Watching price action and candles is what I do most days. As for news, about all it does for me is keep me out of a currency pair and not trade.

 

[Shakone]

well compadre my overall thing is that I just don't believe that a graph alone is enough to make money by anything other than accident, but it gets like 90% of the attention because its the only tool that 90% of the people are using (hammer -> nail a la maslow).

If it's the only tool that 90% are using, then that 90%'s reaction/decision might be predictable based on only that tool. And if that 90% have enough of an impact to move the market, then you're off and running aren't you.

 

[DashRiprock]

If it's the only tool that 90% are using, then that 90%'s reaction/decision might be predictable based on only that tool. And if that 90% have enough of an impact to move the market, then you're off and running aren't you.

it's the money that counts, not the numbers of people, and of course a majority needs to arrive at the same conclusion for it to fulfill itself, otherwise you have 45% either way.

I accept what you are saying, but it sort of clarifies my point: an absolute fraction of the money that goes through the markets is based on graphs. Even net out the regular flow and stick with speculatory money - an absolute fraction are doing it only from from graphs.

and i was of course referring only to the people on tradetowin... 90% of the talk here is about graphs, I havent once seen someone mention PE ratios or PPP or whatever

 

[glyder]

so far as I'm concerened everything I need is in the chart except for my frame of mind, which might be anywhere!

 

[new_trader]

it's the money that counts, not the numbers of people, and of course a majority needs to arrive at the same conclusion for it to fulfill itself, otherwise you have 45% either way.

I accept what you are saying, but it sort of clarifies my point: an absolute fraction of the money that goes through the markets is based on graphs. Even net out the regular flow and stick with speculatory money - an absolute fraction are doing it only from from graphs.

and i was of course referring only to the people on tradetowin... 90% of the talk here is about graphs, I havent once seen someone mention PE ratios or PPP or whatever

True, but I think you may be drawing a false conclusion from this poll. I think the reason that 90% of the talk here is about graphs is because 90% of the people here are mechanical traders, pure and simple. They look for a 'system' or 'set-up' based on some arbitrary (or not) threshold to trigger a trade and apply little or no thinking or judgement in their decision.

These people could just as easily trade with a price threshold alone instead of a pretty coloured line scribbled on a chart. Actually, I would even go as fas as saying that most are looking for that killer algorithm so they can automate their trades while they lie on a banana chair sipping piña coladas on a tropical island paradise.

 

[Black Swan]

Why can't everybody just be happy and get on?

stfu..I love the T2W fighting..

This thread is just another T2W 'Godwin's Law'..

Oh and (if I had to) I reckon I could make a living swing trading FX from one 5hitty litle lagging/trending indicator, no price just an indicator that's been mangled/changed/adjusted/turned on its head and doesn't even look like it does 'out of the box' and breaks the rules of its creator..

Others make money from a random entry..honestly, who cares, we all know it's a probability based game, I see things happening on my charts then probably price will go in my favour, can I keep my nut in the game and manage my money (ergo the trade) is what really matters.

 

[spreader_legger]

Well said George Soros

True, but I think you may be drawing a false conclusion from this poll. I think the reason that 90% of the talk here is about graphs is because 90% of the people here are mechanical traders, pure and simple. They look for a 'system' or 'set-up' based on some arbitrary (or not) threshold to trigger a trade and apply little or no thinking or judgement in their decision.

These people could just as easily trade with a price threshold alone instead of a pretty coloured line scribbled on a chart. Actually, I would even go as fas as saying that most are looking for that killer algorithm so they can automate their trades while they lie on a banana chair sipping piña coladas on a tropical island paradise.

 

[HowardCohodas]

Had the question been "All you need to know to trade is in the tick data?" I would say yes. However, few of us have the ability to do so.

 

[new_trader]

Had the question been "All you need to know to trade is in the tick data?" I would say yes. However, few of us have the ability to do so.

That statement is somewhat contradictory. If all you need to know is there then ’ability’ is not a factor and not only would you never have a losing trade but anybody would be able to trade successfully, just do what ‘it’ tells you. The question is inadequate on so many levels and adequate at the same time. It would have been just as useful to ask - “Whatever you use to trade has everything you want”...0r even "“Whatever you use to trade has everything you can get”...

 

[Splitlink]

This week the Royal Wedding has, to me, been a bullish no-brainer. I could be wrong for to-morrow but, so far, I have made good progress.

Was that in the chart? Of course it wasn't! I'm not a monarchist, either, But I looked at my chart from a bullish viewpoint and got in at double bottoms. This means that outside information does have an influence on me. No number of ticks can alter that fact because I do not look at them. This is the same with all lines, fibs, pivots, whatever. We see what each of us wants to see, either a continuance or a reversal.

 

[nunrgguy]

Im a moron therefore I answered 'Yes'

 

[arabianights]

amazed there are tards who can think yes

 

[Masquerade]

amazed there are tards who can think yes

I feel honoured to be in the company of the greats.

 

[fihunts]

amazed there are tards who can think yes

Arabian, I clicked back through a few of your other posts. Now this is just an observation, but you seem a little frustrated, hostile and just mean. Whats up with all the nastiness?

 

[Devilicus]

I think the answer is probably 'false' but then, I am yet to find anything better.

I know that the new fashionable thing is to trade from the DOM/T+S on this site. I got nothing out of it, personally - even after taken the oft-used advice of ''stare at it for 8 hours per day for 2 weeks and you'll start to see things''. I just saw randomness.

for those that think charts are rubbish though, how would you advice one swing trades then? Say, typically holding for a few days?

The best trader i've ever seen (who posts some of his live trades on twitter but im not gonna say who he is) seems to day/swing trade. Im certain he doesn't look at the DOM. He does mention and post various chart formations though (although I guess he could be lying to us to throw us off the scent)

 

[Black Swan]

Arabian, I clicked back through a few of your other posts. Now this is just an observation, but you seem a little frustrated, hostile and just mean. Whats up with all the nastiness?

Yeah Dave, just chill, be more like me..:innocent:

 

[Black Swan]

Im a moron therefore I answered 'Yes'

you must be mate, 'cos there's no "yes" on the poll..