Disliked
Niall O’Connor, a technical analyst at JPMorgan Chase & Co. in New York.Ignored
- Joined Nov 2007 | Status: Conscious Incompetence | 3,274 Posts
Don't wish it were easier, wish you were better. ~ Jim Rohn
Why do indicators not work/work? Why is Forex not truly random? 129 replies
How to find out why the euro is strong or why the dollar is weak? 8 replies
Why do we trade?... no really, why? 51 replies
Why is Sentix Investor Confidence influentional on EURUSD! Why ??? 0 replies
Why oh Why .... 19 replies
Disliked
Niall O’Connor, a technical analyst at JPMorgan Chase & Co. in New York.Ignored
DislikedWith all due respect, I have to disagree. I make no claims to have a conduit to the universal truth here, there are many ways to achieve a given goal, but I have talked to a number of very successful traders and one of the common things they shared was an unambiguous definition of what their entries consisted of, there were no 'grey areas'. This was vital to keeping an accurate record of how any particular system was performing. I certainly don't see using high school statistics to track trading progress or properly defining an entry as getting...Ignored
Dislikeduntil the day comes that a trader can clearly define WHY their 'tools' work....Ignored
DislikedDéjà vu, haven't we already done this bit a few pages back?
Ultimately isn't any (technical) analysis tool just trying to identify prices/areas where there's a probability of more sellers than buyers or vice versa? If it's right then it's identified those prices/areas accurately. If it isn't, then it hasn't.Ignored
Disliked
if something is that hard to explain, then is it real or just imagined?Ignored
DislikedI think we need to do some practical research in the field....where's the nearest beach!Ignored
Dislikedpersonally i'm not convinced there is such a thing as probabilities in marketsIgnored
Dislikedunder-trading and the way in which people use their 'tools' that results in under-trading.Ignored
Dislikedi mean it's one thing to say "the big boys use them", and it's another for it to be actual fact.Ignored
DislikedWell it can't be certainty, there's no guarantee price will move in a particular direction, that would just seem to leave what, total randomness?Ignored
QuoteDislikedunder-trading?
QuoteDislikedThe likes of JPMorgan Chase not big enough for ya?
Dislikedmaybe, but more so that there are better reasons for someone who is going to actually send volume through forex to do so than because it hits a fib level.Ignored
Dislikedwho says they speak the truth though? to read it and to see it in action... chalk and cheese perhaps. misdirection perhaps. refer to paragraph 1 above.Ignored
DislikedSure, that might not be their motive for the trade but they have to enter/exit somewhere, why not at universally recognised levels?Ignored
QuoteDislikedSeriously, you think they may have a hidden agenda behind talking about levels being broken and downside risk?
The only people I've seen move the FX market with rhetoric or jawboning have been central banks, and even then market reaction is often only kneejerk and temporary.
Dislikedand why not at any other level? that is the main question i have, really.Ignored
Quoting nubcakeDislikedand why not at any other level? that is the main question i have, really.Ignored
DislikedSo, if somebody would tell me "Trade fibs or I'll shoot you!" (because there's no other sane reason to use fibs), I'd look at that level.Ignored
Disliked50% is a level of equilibrium after a retracement following a clear trend. So, if somebody would tell me "Trade fibs or I'll shoot you!" (because there's no other sane reason to use fibs), I'd look at that level.Ignored