The finest in trend trading - DEBUNKED

[jaquille]

I think the biggest part of trading is CONFIDENCE.

When you actually begin to understand what trading profitably entails, you will realize that you are facing uncertainties at every turn. Experienced traders accept this and place their trades and set their stops and they make money because they have confidence in how they trade.

Then you see new traders who are desparate for certainty, and you wish you could convince them that there is no certainty in these markets. There is only confidence in your ideas and your risk management strategies. Confidence that is built on taking many many trades and experiencing many different types of price action.

So I read this thread and I see people asking the wrong questions and answering the wrong questions. It’s all so pointless! Stop wasting your time and start looking at the MARKETS, you know, that place where all the money is being made!

If you really need somewhere to start, I can sympathize. So start with support and resistance. Study what the foreign exchange market is and how it operates. Figure out how support and resistance is a real concept based on how real traders are trading this market. Then all you need is a lot of screen time and a few thousand trades under your belt.

95% of people don’t make money because they don’t have any confidence in what they are doing. They come on here and get some ideas here and there, write some rules, and think they have found certainty. But during periods of failure, confidence will keep you on track, and certainty will not be there to support you.

Thank you for sharing.

[jaquille]

Thank you very much to all of you! I hope you can see how much you are giving with your comments. I’m learning a lot from you all. Sincerely thanks.
…

I am not a philosopher or something like that. I’m just a person [B]convinced[/B] that if [B]I[/B] will, by myself, not open my mind, learn and adapt myself, my inner to the outside, then [B]I[/B] will take away from me opportunity. [B]No one else[/B] is responsible for what I decide.

You are quite welcome. Please keep us apprised of your progress.

[jaquille]

People’s heads need something to do so they can loose themselves in complicated fog & things the markets couldn’t care less about.

Truly simple methods are scoffed at. Complex methods are called “simple” and applauded. Reality is shunned and myths are revered.

[jaquille]

Remember, we are trying to generate a definition that is very precise in its language, suitable for generating a flowchart so that a computer programmer could use it to write a program to trade a trend.

[B]In short, our definition must be extremely specific and we assume the reader is totally ignorant.[/B]

Using the subtrend idea, we a basically breaking down our analysis to the atomic level if you like.

Lets revise…

1. uptrend - higher lows, downtrend - lower highs.

2. trendlines with correct placement.

3. trendline breaks giving hypothetical entry and exit points.

4. efficient and inefficient trends.

5. subtrends - the fundamental building blocks of the trend.

What about PRICE?

[system]

The open, high and low for the day are known levels at any given point in time. Where price is in relation to the daily open, daily high and daily low can be measured in pips and in time. [B]There is no debate or interpretation.[/B]

And no OPINION.

The minute you add the component price and it’s relationship to the OpenHighLow the mask of “Trend” with all it’s intellectual compartisation falls down.

If you take the component price away you can construct anything you like to make it [trend] fit into your own little boxes & carry on intellecutualizing & opinionizing about it until the end of time.

You only have to look at above chart.

[TalonD]

:

What about PRICE?

In defining a trend with highs and lows price is inferred if not mentiioned explicity, BUT (and that’s a big but ) the definer must pick multilple prices and see how they relate to each other. The problem of course is that different definers will pick different prices.

On the other hand if you only pick one price, open, high, low, close then there is no ambiguity.

well I guess I’m stating the bleedin obvious but then I do tend to do that at times.

[MattJones]

So much information in this forum … I’m really starting to love it.

Best Regards,
Matt Jones .

[Master_Tang]

You only have to look at above chart.

Price… Amazing how it almost follows that angled line…

[simbafx]

If the entry is random, then so is the risk.

Its fair to say that entry defines risk, and that better entries can reduce risk, and improve reward. So whilst the entry trigger has an effect, and it can be optimised, its still a relatively unimportant aspect. Ironically, there’s no shortage of perfectly good entry methods, they’re discussed openly, and known to practically everyone. The most inexperienced new trader probably already knows more than they will ever need to know regarding entry triggers even if their research is only limited to reading a couple of threads on a trading forum.

Whilst its fair to say that a random entry, results in random risk, the same can be said for any entry trigger. It really doesnt help to think in terms of the outcome of a single trade. The average risk from a random entry over a large enough sample is anything but random, its highly predictable. Similarly, the same argument can be applied to any entry trigger.

Whilst its human nature to deconstruct problems into smaller component parts, the fundemental problem with this thread is that it doesnt particularly help to consider one element of a trading system in isolation. Its the synergistic relationships that exist between the component elements of a trading methodology that result in positive expectancy.

Over on the other thread they’re looking at trendlines, dow theory, failure swing patterns, indicators, moving averages, linear regression, polynomial regression, you name it, they’ll probaly come up with it, and the majority of contributors will conclude that these techniques “dont work”. I understand why they are doing it, because I did the same, I wasted YEARS testing that stuff (and despite having perfectly adequate methods, I still try to improve techniques for determining trend, and I’ll probably do so until the day I die).

The truth is, it ALL works, IF they use it appropriately.

Rather than regurgitating the same simplistic nonsense that 1001 others have suggested before them, they might want to consider the issue of how they might verify if the techniques they are arging about actually work.

The posts contained within this thread are of far more practical value to anyone whose interested in trend following, and thats probably quite sad, as the people who would benefit the most are probably focussing on practical techniques being discussed in the other thread, rather than attemptingt to understand the underlying concepts.

[jaquille]

:

In defining a trend with highs and lows price is inferred if not mentiioned explicity, BUT (and that’s a big but ) the definer must pick multilple prices and see how they relate to each other. The problem of course is that different definers will pick different prices.

On the other hand if you only pick one price, open, high, low, close then there is no ambiguity.

well I guess I’m stating the bleedin obvious but then I do tend to do that at times.

It may be obvious to you. But that is fact is not very popular on this forum.

[jaquille]

Price… Amazing how it almost follows that angled line…

That angled line is drawn from the open to the current close and it replots each bar. Price doesn’t follow the line, [B][I]the line follows the price[/I][/B]!!

[jaquille]

Its fair to say that entry defines risk, and that better entries can reduce risk, and improve reward. So whilst the entry trigger has an effect, and it can be optimised, its still a relatively unimportant aspect. Ironically, there’s no shortage of perfectly good entry methods, they’re discussed openly, and known to practically everyone. The most inexperienced new trader probably already knows more than they will ever need to know regarding entry triggers even if their research is only limited to reading a couple of threads on a trading forum.

Whilst its fair to say that a random entry, results in random risk, the same can be said for any entry trigger. It really doesnt help to think in terms of the outcome of a single trade. The average risk from a random entry over a large enough sample is anything but random, its highly predictable. Similarly, the same argument can be applied to any entry trigger.

Whilst its human nature to deconstruct problems into smaller component parts, the fundemental problem with this thread is that it doesnt particularly help to consider one element of a trading system in isolation. Its the synergistic relationships that exist between the component elements of a trading methodology that result in positive expectancy.

Over on the other thread they’re looking at trendlines, dow theory, failure swing patterns, indicators, moving averages, linear regression, polynomial regression, you name it, they’ll probaly come up with it, and the majority of contributors will conclude that these techniques “dont work”. I understand why they are doing it, because I did the same, I wasted YEARS testing that stuff (and despite having perfectly adequate methods, I still try to improve techniques for determining trend, and I’ll probably do so until the day I die).

The truth is, it ALL works, IF they use it appropriately.

Rather than regurgitating the same simplistic nonsense that 1001 others have suggested before them, they might want to consider the issue of how they might verify if the techniques they are arging about actually work.

The posts contained within this thread are of far more practical value to anyone whose interested in trend following, and thats probably quite sad, as the people who would benefit the most are probably focussing on practical techniques being discussed in the other thread, rather than attemptingt to understand the underlying concepts.

I have never seen a risk formula that includes entry price. Would you please provide one. Thank you.

[jaquille]

[B][I]The posts contained within this thread are of far more practical value to anyone whose interested in trend following[/I][/B], and thats probably quite sad, as the people who would benefit the most are probably focussing on practical techniques being discussed in the other thread, rather than attemptingt to understand the underlying concepts.

The light bulb just went off!

The “trend” followers are really trying to be [B][I]PRICE FOLLOWERS[/I][/B] which is what a few of us do!! The “trend” followers are spending their time trying to define something which really doesn’t exist except in their own minds.

On the other hand, some of us look at precisely defined levels (open, high, low), look at where price is relative to those levels and trade accordingly. We do not feel the need to give names or labels to that which only exists in our minds.

[jaquille]

Isn’t a trading forum a place to share ideas? Then why is there so much animosity amongst the traders? If you don’t like my ideas or methods, that’s OK. If you can debunk them, then even better. There is no reason to be mean and nasty to another person because their trading ideas are different than yours.

Why is “trend” held with the reverence of a religious zealot? Why can’t the existence of “trend” be questioned without the questioner being hated? Why are people focusing on each other instead of the ideas being discussed?

[gasanvill]

[B]The finest in trend trading - DEBUNKED[/B]

The purpose of this thread is to show that TREND is a concept that only exists in the mind of the trader and therefore a MYTH.

It doesn´t matter if trend is a Myth or not. The fact is that lot of traders make money using trends. In the end…isn´t that the purpose of trading?

I agree with you when you say that trend only exists in the mind of a trader. But if you are saying that people shouldn´t trade using methods that involves trends, then I think you are wrong.

[Buckscoder]

[I]The way the market seemed to you was actually the way [B]you created it
in your own mind[/B].

Every single pixel here is right! One bit I will spend to throw in the pot: What are markets? Markets are people’s society. Where people meet and trade. It’s all about people. Think about it.

[jaquille]

It doesn´t matter if trend is a Myth or not. The fact is that lot of traders make money using trends. In the end…isn´t that the purpose of trading?

I agree with you when you say that trend only exists in the mind of a trader. But if you are saying that people shouldn´t trade using methods that involves trends, then I think you are wrong.

The FACT is that most traders LOSE. I don’t recall saying anyone shouldn’t use any particular method. What someone else uses to trade is their business.

[Buckscoder]

The FACT is that most traders LOSE.

I agree. Nobody will change that, because nobody is able to change the people. Plus in all honesty, the winners live out of the losers like the butchers live from the lambs. So, letz change dumb money to smart money, pray this wonderful world and thank the losers for paying our profit! Did I mention anywhere before I am misanthrope? If not, then I do it now. Well, as long as I do not join the 95% club. :rolleyes:

[Northwest_PIP]

The light bulb just went off!

The “trend” followers are really trying to be [B][I]PRICE FOLLOWERS[/I][/B] which is what a few of us do!! The “trend” followers are spending their time trying to define something which really doesn’t exist except in their own minds.

On the other hand, some of us look at precisely defined levels (open, high, low), look at where price is relative to those levels and trade accordingly. We do not feel the need to give names or labels to that which only exists in our minds.

You’ve lost me - because you think the definition of a trend is something that it isn’t. Of course trend proponents are price followers! By definition a trend is:
[I]
“the general direction followed by a road, river, coastline, or the like”[/I]

To say a trend only exists in the mind of the trader - therefore it is a myth is really peculiar. Do you believe that the Sun trends across the sky every day? Do you trend towards getting sleepy at night?

Your logic only works at the micro level where there is no [I]perspective.
[/I]
What is “perspective” when it comes to the markets? It’s [B][I]timeframes[/I][/B]. Two people looking at the same timeframe can easily agree on an identifiable trend.

[jaquille]

You’ve lost me - because you think the definition of a trend is something that it isn’t. Of course trend proponents are price followers! By definition a trend is:
[I]
“the general direction followed by a road, river, coastline, or the like”[/I]

To say a trend only exists in the mind of the trader - therefore it is a myth is really peculiar. Do you believe that the Sun trends across the sky every day? Do you trend towards getting sleepy at night?

Your logic only works at the micro level where there is no [I]perspective.
[/I]
What is “perspective” when it comes to the markets? It’s [B][I]timeframes[/I][/B]. Two people looking at the same timeframe can easily agree on an identifiable trend.

Does the sun trend across the sky? No. The earth spins on its axis giving the ILLUSION the sun trends across the sky.

Do I get sleepy at night? Sometimes I do and sometimes I don’t.

The logic works at every level.

Two people looking at the same time frame can easily [B][I]disagree [/I][/B]and that’s why there is a market. One trader is buying when the other trader is selling. Without this disagreement, there can be no market.