[quote=Richardj;1568640]
My approach (as I see it) is a little like putting little pieces of fabric, or sensors, at different locations and depths with a wind tunnel. I am seldom (if ever) very accurate in either my long or short entry points (where your type of approach would be more accurate, I would imagine).
The reason for this is that my approach (I find) enables me to see 'the flow' of the currents - which enables me to be VERY accurate in terms of where they will lead price to in due course - but NOT, regreatably, very accurate quite a lot of the time, in the route that price will take to get to the destination.
The reason for the all this blab, above (sorry - but it was necessary to give the background) is that your response illustrates what I'm constantly thinking when reading the more proficient trader's comments on this thread: namely, that the great disadvantage of what I would call 'highly technical trading' is that people doing that do not see the 'currents' that ARE DRIVING PRICE. They draw lines, and say this or that is turning up or down, or crossing over something... but they don't see the forces driving price.
Because I am looking at the 'manifestations' (MAs - the little streamers in the wind tunnel)
For this reason, I never use stops - because unlike your approach, I wouldn't know where to put them.
All I know is that whilst the route taken by price is seldom exactly what I expect suing my 'wind streamers' approach, price virtually ALWAYS reaches the destination I expect.
So: different strokes for different folks.
After I posted my comment about the graphs looking so 'strange' - and then received the two responses that I did, I once again realized that I was seeing the 'currents', as I call them... and that practitioners using your type of techniques simply cannot see. Thus, it wasn't clear to you what I was talking about.
Looks like maybe the ole 'wind tunnel' might need a thorough maintenance inspection before any more predictions. M2B
My approach (as I see it) is a little like putting little pieces of fabric, or sensors, at different locations and depths with a wind tunnel. I am seldom (if ever) very accurate in either my long or short entry points (where your type of approach would be more accurate, I would imagine).
The reason for this is that my approach (I find) enables me to see 'the flow' of the currents - which enables me to be VERY accurate in terms of where they will lead price to in due course - but NOT, regreatably, very accurate quite a lot of the time, in the route that price will take to get to the destination.
The reason for the all this blab, above (sorry - but it was necessary to give the background) is that your response illustrates what I'm constantly thinking when reading the more proficient trader's comments on this thread: namely, that the great disadvantage of what I would call 'highly technical trading' is that people doing that do not see the 'currents' that ARE DRIVING PRICE. They draw lines, and say this or that is turning up or down, or crossing over something... but they don't see the forces driving price.
Because I am looking at the 'manifestations' (MAs - the little streamers in the wind tunnel)
For this reason, I never use stops - because unlike your approach, I wouldn't know where to put them.
All I know is that whilst the route taken by price is seldom exactly what I expect suing my 'wind streamers' approach, price virtually ALWAYS reaches the destination I expect.
So: different strokes for different folks.
After I posted my comment about the graphs looking so 'strange' - and then received the two responses that I did, I once again realized that I was seeing the 'currents', as I call them... and that practitioners using your type of techniques simply cannot see. Thus, it wasn't clear to you what I was talking about.
Looks like maybe the ole 'wind tunnel' might need a thorough maintenance inspection before any more predictions. M2B
Attached Image
so let him learn this slowly 
peace
:
