Again, this is natural (biological/chemical/physical) not artificial like the markets.
I expect that’s exactly what Charles means by “anecdotal evidence with heavy selection bias” or whatever he said.
That’s a straw man argument, and it’s not applicable here.
Nobody said that.
Those things measure what they measure and display them.
Fib levels don’t “measure” anything. They calculate something artificially, according to the so-called “golden ratio”. Hopeless.
All the indepedent US university studies I’ve been shown on Fib levels have failed to find any more significance for them than for random lines, TWB, so I strongly disagree with you. This is well known. Just a myth of “retail traders”, I’m afraid, and reinforced by people selling EA’s/books/courses/info. Nothing real there at all.
Be careful what you assume about people posting here, Patrick. Some of them may have noprofitable or professional experience at all, but just like the sound of their own voices. There’s some good information in this forum, from a handful of people with longstanding successful/pro experience, but it’s a tiny minority of what you read here. There’s a lot of nonsense too (as in most forums).
Most (nearly all) retail forex traders are unsuccessful, and they nearly all get their “information” from each other. As a result they continue to believe what they’ve always believed, and some of it’s rubbish.
For every MA strategy, I can show you two crosses that generate losses to the one cross that profits… can be said about every Indicator in use out there…semantics
True for me also, Lukas (and I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them are even the same ones), but unlike you I’ve learned that it isn’t worth replying to Trendswithbenefits when he’s in trolley mode.
“They are used by enough traders to generate support and resistance” is a joke. He doesn’t even understand that retail forex traders using them aren’t in the interbank market and can have no effect at all on it for that reason, let alone that their volume is insignificant anyway, that they’re using hundreds of different kinds of charts, and countless other reasons. Ridiculous.
You can’t even begin to discuss it intelligently, on those terms.
Honestly, I wouldn’t try.
I just wish we had an “ignore” function.
Here’s a good page on Fibonacci from Lock Haven University. Not directly related to trading but still an interesting, entertaining and (to some people) educational read:-
A phenomenon is any thing which manifests itself. Phenomena are often, but not always, understood as “things that appear” or “experiences” for a sentient being, or in principle may be so
" Clouds are a natural phenomenon generated by water vapour in the sky"
just buy the book, you can get the book used on amazon for a couple of bucks, you must not buy a print new version of it. try it and see if it helps you.
you wont find any guidance on a forum, you will only find frustrated people blocking anything they dont know about. then a bit later they will change to topic to something they heard about and unconnected to your question.
people who know who welles wilder is will as well know that paying for his books some money is for sure no waisted money.
but be warned, the delta phenomenon is designed to catch cycles, this means ups and downs over years… it is completely useless in daytrading or swing trading.
If I may beg to differ, the cycles are certainly tradeable at much lowertimescales than that. and would be of great use to a swing trader, over a day or two - probably even intraday. It is not an easy concept to understand and would certainly require a significant amount of work to master.
you are free to apply it to lower timeframes but the generalcycle theories are not designed and not applied to lower time frames.
the general cycle theories have nothing to do with technical analysis or PA. they are the theories of boom and bust which are valid and repetivie since over 100 years.
The theories do not implement a specific time frame (like every 7 years theres a crash etc. like its popular said in media and online media) but implement strategies on how to identify when the environment change and identify specific entree points on long/short positions on different asset classes which are interconnnected by the cycle itself.
as you can see, following a crysis (ccle starts over again from scratch) you long equities among bonds for security. mid cycle you hold into equities while you start longing commodities and short bonds (commodities and bonds are highly inversive correlated).once bonds show signs ofturning you slowly get out of equities since a bond rally is a great sign that the cycle is at its peak (half time) and will soon after lead to a “market crash”. you start shorting equities and bonds. at the very end you short eerything before you start longing bonds and equities again. once the dust settles after the “market crash” you repeat exactly the same again, over and over again. its a standard market practice which works since over a century, the only crucial aspect is the timing of the different asst classes. and there is where welles wilder tried to implement a framework with his delta phenomenom approach to improve timing. has nothing to do with voodo or astrology or magic (like others stated, not you @Falstaff)
edit: it by the way as well has not much to do with trading currencies, since the book is older than the concept of trading free floating currencies and especially in the retail sector.
If I may quote the actual book, at page 160 it is stated ;
[quote=“The Book, post:32, topic:131368”]
"Short term Delta works exactly like the other time frames. Each market has it’s own series and inversions occur in exactly the same way. However, Short Term Delta has 2 or 3 turning points per day [/quote]
That chart of intermarket relationships, from stockcharts, looks more like something from the website owner’s own book “Intermarket Analysis” - Are you sure you’re reading up on the right book ?
I believe the “Kondratiev cycle” (54-57 years) - is somewhat longer than that ! and certainly some of the “Elliot wave supercycles” etc - go way back before Roman times !
[Edit - as indeed do the “20,000 year” Ice age cycles which humanity is periodically responsible for thawing out due to anthropogenic carbon dioxide production ]
If I may quote the actual book, at page 160 it is stated ;
just checked page 160. nope isnt in there. can you post a scan of that? maybe you are reading the wrong book… or are you reading some spin-off book from a marketer selling stuff to you?
before you make fun of business cycles by exagerating into kondratiev (i was not talking or reffering t/about the kondratiev cycles=kondratiev cycles are technological cycles and not economical or busines cycles) rather check on the knowledge you obviously dont have.
anyways, as usual, knowledge has no justification of existance in this place as it meets unknowledgable ignorance which turns into educational talks which are met with more ignorance (teaching someone who doesnt want to be taught). always the same. once your views or believes are challenged you immediately throw away your toys and get emo . and since my time isnt cheap im out of this and let you enjoy your point of view. if you think you are right then you are right for you.
Sorry for actually being able to quote from the book - (Because I do have it ! ) Clearly you don’t and are simply aspiring to attribute a subject matter to it, which is pure guesswork.
