Ok sweetpip, to clarify, these are the comments I found relevant.
It can certainly be considered a trend if one hour is greater than the duration over which you typically hold your trades. The probability of exiting with a profit is influence by a number fo factors, but if you eliminate external factors such as stops, targets, trade management etc then the probability of exiting with a profit will increase.
If your position trading and holding a position for years then movement over a one hour period (assuming the markets not reacting to a 911 style event) does not even warrant being considered as noise.
The counter argument also holds true. A move of 5000 pips over an 24 month period is completely irrelevant if your scalping from a one minute chart.
One trader considers it a âtrendâ but the other sees it as ânoiseâ. Doesnât that agree with my assertion in post #1?
And a third trader sees it as chart painting.
Meanwhile the smart money movers & chart painters laugh themselves all the way to the bank. USDX chart painting is a classic siince a couple of month.
You are comparing apples & oranges. If Iâm looking at a 5min chart, yes my trend will look like noise, or nothing, to a trader looking at a daily chartâŚtrends can be timeframe dependant too. You can find identifiable patterns on any chart, whether itâs wedges, head & shoulders, double tops etc. Like I said before, unless you are told or it is labeled, you canât tell the difference between a 5 min chart or a hourly chart because of the fractal nature of things. If you chose a particular pattern on your timeframe of choice, then that is what you work with. Much like you can choose the open price of whatever timeframe you use to trigger your entryâŚthe open price of the 5 min chart isnât represented on my 30min chart, so it doesnât exist for me.
I agree that trend is conceptual. However, just because someone chooses to consider something as noise doesnt mean that it is noise. The move occurring over the space of a hour will have very similar properties to the moves occurring over much longer time horizons.
The properties extracted from trends occurring over differing time horizons are fractal, and they are directly related through specific and quantifiable scaling factors.
Trend is no more or less conceptual than any method. You talk about comparing price to yesterdays close, and yet in a 24 hour market such as forex youâll struggle to specify the time at which the close occurs. I might believe the market closes at 10:00 PM GMT, and price may currently be above that, you may believe the market closes at 00:00 AM GMT and price may currently below that, and of course, by our own definations we would both be correct. Price could be simultaneously both above and below yesterdays close.
You could argue that a day, or week or month is an arbirary concept. Why dont we use lunar months ?
Specifying the close at some arbitary point in time that suits your purpose, is no different to declaring trend to be equivelent to the gradiant of a 20 period linear regression. The concept is either useful, or it isnt.
[B]
This is the most useful sentence in this whole thread. We dun need to argue do trend really exist, trend trader can make money, non trend trader can also make money. That is all that matters. Why should we separate trend or no trend. This is a place for newbies traders who want to learn. WE SHOULD EDUCATE NEW TRADERS THAT NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, AS LONG as WE CAN MAKE MONEY CONSISTENTLY IN FOREX THAT IS THE CORRECT PATH TO CONTINUE. [/B] 
I agreeâŚwhatâs the point really unless there is an ulterior motive behind it. Whatever prompted us to enter a trade in the first place is over once weâve entered the trade. Once weâre in a trade, trend or no trend we need to manage it. We can chose how and when to take profit or loss. However, some donât do that so well, and therein lies the difference between winners & losers.
Who knowsâŚmaybe the trade & price a âtrendâ trader just entered happened to be the same as the trader who used the high/or low of the last 2 candles, or the monthly open. Then what?
You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. We do not have to agree. But we should be respectful of each other.
If this is a place for newbie traders to learn why shouldnât they be exposed to all points of view?
TOUGH QUESTIONS aka
TRADING METHOD B.S. DETECTORWhat is the expectancy of this system or method?
What is the average number of wins percentage?
What is the average win size?
What is the average number of losses percentage?
What is the average loss size?
What was the biggest win?
What was the biggest loss?
What was the longest win streak?
What was the longest loss streak?
How many trades were used to obtain the answers to the above questions?
Were the trades executed with real money?
When did you personally start trading this system or method?
Have [B]ANY [/B]of these questions been answered in âThe finest in trend tradingâ thread?
If not, THINK ABOUT IT. What do you smell?
[B]
I donât know why my reply to this got deleted but it really peesâs me off that it did.:mad:[/B]
If you imposed that constraint on every thread in a trading forum, youâd kill the site traffic at a single stroke, and that really isnt in the interests of the sites owners.
I suspect that if you where to determine and publish these figures based on the entry and exit criteria that theyâve now published, youâd be immediately banned for doing so, because again its not really in anyones interests for you to pour cold water on a bunch of enthusiastic contributors. They wouldnt believe your backtest results anyway !
You can lead a horse to water, but you cant make it drink.
I have no idea other than the forum admins cleaned up this thread. I donât recall your post being rude or hostile.
[I]âYou are comparing apples & oranges.â[/I]
So many trends, so little time. Either there is a âtrendâ or there isnât. Say there are different trends on different timeframes is an âillusionâ. It is an âillusionâ because it is relative to the observer. You say âupâ, I say âdownâ and we are both right? The implications are staggering! How does anyone ever lose?
Right now is all that matters. You enter a trade. Either price goes for you or against you. How much against you is up to you. How much for you it up to the market.
[B]âTrend or no trendâ[/B], that is the question.
[B]DONâT TREND ON ME![/B]
You are correct on both counts there. Iâve notice another post gone too.
What they basically boiled down to was that I donât think you can prove that something does not exist. Lack of proof of existence does not equal nonexistence.
Let me put it this wayâŚI have a frog that can sing professional opera but it only does it when nobody is looking⌠and it knows when somebody is looking. You donât believe me ??? Then prove it doesnât exist! The FACT is, you canât prove i donât have such a frog. Soooo you want me to prove this frog really exists ?? if i used the same logic that you use then I donât have to prove it, its up to you to disprove it and since you can not prove me wrong I MUST BE RIGHTâŚlol
Does this make any sense ? Of coarse not!! But it makes as much sense as trying to prove that trends donât exist.
BTW, I canât prove Bigfoot, the Easter Bunny, Unicorns God or little green men from space exist either, so does that mean that they really DO exist? Using this logic, they really do exist because i canât prove they donât. 
I agree entirely about the problems in comparing anything to an arbitary reference point. The same problems exist when comparing price to a bar open or close, or daily high or low, or pivot or fib line, or indicator etc.
The issue that you are avoiding which I mentioned in my first post is the kurtosis in the distribution of market moves. Extended moves occur far more frequently than you might predict, and the reasons behind those moves, in terms of crowd behaviour are well understood.
If trends did not exist, weâd see a normal distribution in returns. However, we see deviations of 4,5,6 sigma occurring time after time, and across numerous time horizons, those moves do not occur by random chance, they occur because thereâs a bias in the behaviour of market participants, and thats a trend.
Maybe its a question of semantics, but Iâd argue that the presence of kurtosis in the distribution of returns is a definitive proof that non random crowd participation occurs, and therefore trends exists.
Questions as to how that trend can be identified and exploited in real time are another matter altogether.
Question.
Do you remember the first piano key tie you saw anyone wearing?
Do you remember the first one you saw one in a store?
Do you remember the last time you saw someone wearing one?
Do you remember them disappearing from store shelves?
Did you wear one?
It was a trend.
It happened.
It wasnât a myth, and it wasnât an illusion. (although it would have been better if it had been)
The idea of having absolutes in a trend is the mythical part.
The fact that for a certain amount of time price moved up or down, whether short term, or long, is a reality.
The only subjective part to it at all, is when one called a move started, and when one calls it over.
Glad to see this back on track:D
Of course itâs relative. Thatâs the entire point of trading. Your own strategy is subjective. You trade the break out of two candles on what the 1Hr chart I believe it was. That matters nothing to the man that trades on the 5min chart, or myself on the daily chart.
Have you not referenced the weekend open? That matters nothing to a man trading on a monthly chart.
Trading is all relative. If it wasnât, there wouldnât be a market to exist in the first place. What you see is what you see.
If a trend is a myth, then your trading is just as much as a myth.
Price is price. Price increases. Price decreases. Once you add any other element to that, you have created subjectivity.
Part of the problem is how âtrendâ is represented in trading. Most traders use chart. They draw lines on the charts to show âtrendâ. The market can exist without charts. Can you say the same for âtrendâ? If yes, then define âtrendâ without a reference to a chart.
We can say with certainty the direction of price between any 2 points IN THE PAST. Is that âtrendâ? We can with certainty the direction of price between a point in the past and the current price. Is that also âtrendâ? What we canât say with certainty is the direction of price will travel in the future. Isnât the purpose of âtrendâ to determine the direction price will travel in the future so you can trade with the âtrendâ and let âtrendâ be your friend?