The Markets, Trading & Charts Thread

[kevsta]

Your knockers do have a point. Making the occasional prediction together with all the relevant explanations and being proved right is fine but it still falls under the category of "anecdotal evidence".

At the end of the day, the only thing that counts is the bottom line. If (as it seems) you can do several trades a day then at a conservative estimate, your account should grow by at least 10% per week. In that case, a $100 account would be worth in excess of $1,000,000 in 2 years and $10,000,000,000 in 4 years time. Of course, it's still possible to wipe out your account with a bad run of luck but that doesn't seem likely since you have the house edge.

If I thought I could do that then I would give up my day job - and possibly posting on JREF until I could buy James Randi out.

yes indeed. as I have always said I was looking for input really, but am so in the wrong place, if people cant even see from the last 12 pages that I appear to somehow have a better than the average subscription service level of detail and accuracy then I am fully wasting my time.

because Ive read those for years, and I can see the difference.

and because instead of intelligent discussion of the rest of the indisputable market facts, what we get is people not even understanding the very basics and 12 pages of trying explain utterly kindergartened up charts to vacant staring eyes.

so thanks to everybody who has contributed in a positive sense but Im definitely not getting what I was looking for here, so over and out.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

yes indeed. as I have always said I was looking for input really, but am so in the wrong place, if people cant even see from the last 12 pages that I appear to somehow have a better than the average subscription service level of detail and accuracy then I am fully wasting my time.

Indeed.

because Ive read those for years, and I can see the difference.

ICANTAKEPICTURESOFDEMONS also was convinced he could see faces of demons in television static. Just sayin'.

and because instead of intelligent discussion of the rest of the indisputable market facts, what we get is people not even understanding the very basics and 12 pages of trying explain utterly kindergartened up charts to vacant staring eyes.

"Glazed over eyes" would be more accurate.

so thanks to everybody who has contributed in a positive sense but Im definitely not getting what I was looking for here, so over and out.

Could you chart how many times you've said this?

What's the over/under for his return? I give him less than 2 hours.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Mark your calendar. One year from today.

If kevsta is still in absentia at that point, we'll have to assume his quest failed or he is unable to post for some reason.

Lord knows, if he were to succeed in a big way, heaven and earth could not stop him from gloating here.

Point of info - I never did see the 3-pushes or obvious stop-runs or triangles. And I really tried.

Honest.

 

[GlennB]

the price will move in 3 waves, here.. I WILL DRAW THE LINES IN WEEKS IN ADVANCE..

Do exactly that.

Publish (here or elsewhere) your predictions and refer to those and those only in any analysis. Every one of them, but nothing that's analysed post hoc.

The way tipsters snare punters is to cherry-pick the results they want people to see. The only way to avoid that pitfall is to publish every tip.

Do it. This is the perfect venue for the experiment.

 

[AdMan]

Do exactly that.

Publish (here or elsewhere) your predictions and refer to those and those only in any analysis. Every one of them, but nothing that'sanalysed post hoc.

The way tipsters snare punters is to cherry-pick the results they want people to see. The only way to avoid that pitfall is to publish every tip.

Do it. This is the perfect venue for the experiment.

Why do I get a sense of déjà vu?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8871675#post8871675

Oh, that's why.

 

[GlennB]

Why do I get a sense of déjà vu?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8871675#post8871675

Oh, that's why.

Whoops

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Why do I get a sense of déjà vu?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8871675#post8871675

Oh, that's why.

Yeah, but he was a muppet/rube back then!

 

[psionl0]

and because instead of intelligent discussion of the rest of the indisputable market facts, what we get is people not even understanding the very basics and 12 pages of trying explain utterly kindergartened up charts to vacant staring eyes.

I think you are being unfair to us knuckleheads.

If we have "vacant staring eyes" then it is because of your insistence on using colourful phrases and jargonized words even when ordinary words convey the same meaning. In spite of that, the standard of questions about your hypothesis have improved which suggests that some comprehension is gradually filtering through.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

If we have "vacant staring eyes" then it is because of your insistence on using colourful phrases and jargonized words even when ordinary words convey the same meaning.

I noticed his understanding of risk/reward ratio was a far cry from mine.

 

[oifvetforreason]

I agree about the risk/reward discussion. It seems like he (and I think I fell into this trap when trying to get concrete, testable predictions from him) confuses risk/reward ratios with odds calculations. From the little I know about either, it seems like betting 1 dollar on a 50-1 bet (with a fair payout) would be, in the long run, considered NO risk and NO reward, because the odds say that you would break even after enough tries.
When I think about risk/reward, I think about the difference between stocks and CDs. The CD has almost no risk, but also earns little interest (lower reward). The stocks have a chance to earn bigger returns in the long run, but there is a risk that the market goes down and you lose money.
If kevsta was right, and he could accurately predict even the PROBABILITY of different movements (and the total "pips" of the movement ...woooa, I'm getting the hang of this!) in the Forex market, risk/reward would be completely removed. I GUARANTEE that casinos don't look at blackjack as a risk/reward formula. They know the probabilities favor them in he long run. That's not risky, it's profitable.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I GUARANTEE that casinos don't look at blackjack as a risk/reward formula. They know the probabilities favor them in he long run. That's not risky, it's profitable.

The world is full of rubes who are quite certain they have a "system" to win in Vegas, but are unable to explain why they aren't millionaires.

Vegas loves these people.

 

[Libra]

it might have started now though..



well I didnt have to bet, but there's no fun in that, is there? I think that was possibly push 1, judging by the way push 2 appears to be underway now.

[qimg]http://clip2net.com/clip/m0/1377594684-clip-44kb.png[/qimg]

if we get some panicking shorts now this could all happen very fast.

or as ever with Gold I could be totally wrong lol. doesnt matter on the long side anyway as I am permanently long. I need to learn to short it.

I suspect you'll have much more success in looking at gold in different currencies as opposed to shorting it in US$.

My gold holdings are in ZAR. There's a good correlation between the gold price and the ZAR/USD ratio, but lagged by 10 months or so. Look at the 10yr gold price chart and flick between US$ and ZAR and notice the peak during the 2008/2009 period and the lagged shift of the peak in ZAR. As I suspected it would, this repeated itself with the recent peak in the 2011/2012 period. Also note the normal>peak>trough>peak>return to normal (looks like the letter M on the chart) during the turbulent 2008 period (in ZAR) This too repeated itself with the 2011/2012 turbulent perdiod (in ZAR).

I did miss the 1st 2008/2009 oppertunity, but the recent 2011/2012 one I took and it paid off well. I bought in mid 2011, sold half off at end 2012 (about 58% gain on half of my holdings) and bought that half back with the recent dip. The bought-back half has had a 15% gain in the last two months. The other half left untouched has had a 38% gain since initially buying.


The US$ chart shows a negative 20% for the last 2 years . . .

Yes, not really "charting" and probably just pot-luck, but the repeat of such a pattern during turbulent global economical times have panned out, the M has shown up again and we're back to normal again (on the ZAR chart that is).

I think there's a danger in over- AND under-analysing these things . . .

 

[kevsta]

Why do I get a sense of déjà vu?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.p...75#post8871675

Oh, that's why.

Yeah, but he was a muppet/rube back then!

you may mock, but indeed I was, a transition most here still need to make. anybody remember me explaining to you how as Goldman Sachs issued their bearish call and helped with the gold slam, that they would be BUYING it hand over fist off all the muppets who were selling?

if Goldman tells the muppets to sell, their prop desk is buying.

make of it what you will.

Table - Goldman Sachs largest GLD buyer in Q2, now 7th largest holder

Guess which bearish bank bought record GLD in Q2

In early April, the status quo was exuberant when none other than Goldman Sachs issued a "sell" on the barbarous relic that has become so indicative of the exuberance of central planning.

At the time, we were skeptical (to say the least) and, just for extra Muppetting, the bank also suggested its clients buy Treasuries.

Goldman Buying Gold, Selling Treasurys To Muppets Whom It Advises To Do Opposite

There was a brief period of confusion for a while when Goldman didn't have clear muppet-stomping trades on the book, and those who wished to frontrun the Goldman prop desk (and do the opposite of the muppet flow) were stuck furiously scratching their head. And granted while it's not a "Stolper", tonight we got two gifts (in the parlance of Whitney Tilson) with Goldman first telling its clients to sell gold following Goldman's lowering of its price target for the yellow metal (which as always means the hedge fund known as Goldman is buying what its clients are selling). And then, moments ago, we also learned that Goldman is also selling the 10 Year, which it advise muppets to buy.

Well, now that the full details of holdings changes have been released for Q2, it is perhaps clearer than ever before that as the bank was telling its clients to "sell, sell, sell" it was itself "buy, buy, buy"-ing the Gold ETF (GLD) with both arms and feet. In Q2, Goldman Sachs added a stunning (and record) 3.7 million 'shares' of GLD. As Paulson dumped his GLD, Goldman lapped it up to become the ETF's 7th largest holder.

ok, so sell your gold and buy 10 year treasuries ? how's that worked out for them so far? everybody who sold anywhere near the lows ("it's going to $1000, $800" etc ) and bought treasuries instead has a rightfully sore butt now.

I however am going to take G6000's advice and give up on trying to teach the wilfully ignorant in general, but there are still a few misconceptions or misunderstandings here about risk:reward I'm going to have one last go at.

I agree about the risk/reward discussion.

If kevsta was right, and he could accurately predict even the PROBABILITY of different movements (and the total "pips" of the movement ...woooa, I'm getting the hang of this!) in the Forex market, risk/reward would be completely removed.

Ok, a basic trade. on a singular basis, this clearly shows the individual trade's risk:reward, the risk is the distance from entry to stoploss, the reward is the distance to the take profit.

does everyone get this? there is no argument or doubt here, it's just fact. the ONLY question, is can you take trades in the right place.

so let's say that one was the first of 4, and was a winner at 3:1, so risking 1% pays me 3%. and I make 3 other trades that week, each losing 1%.

what is my account balance at the end of the week?

and the next week, I win two out of four? balance then?

now lets say I made 20 trades in a month, half winners and half losers, but half of the winners were at 4:1 and the other half were at 2:1.

what is my overall risk:reward figure for all trades that month? (mine is 3.48:1 at last calculation, havent done August yet)

and why are such allegedly learned people having such trouble with such basic math? (ingrained preconceptions and cliches I think)

there is NOTHING complicated or tricky about this, as I keep saying, the ONLY question is can you place yourself in a position to be able to get this risk:reward on your winning trades, and that's where it all goes wrong for the muppets.

Do exactly that.

Publish (here or elsewhere) your predictions and refer to those and those only in any analysis. Every one of them, but nothing that's analysed post hoc.

The way tipsters snare punters is to cherry-pick the results they want people to see. The only way to avoid that pitfall is to publish every tip.

Do it. This is the perfect venue for the experiment.

If somebody had defined the acceptable criteria for this 10 pages ago I would have been up for it, but as this is pretty much what I have been doing for three weeks, with the Nikkei and the S&P and Apple, all the way through here and nobody even looks or acknowledges the continual correctness, really, what's the point? "Pearls before Swine" springs to mind.

Apple has rolled over out of distribution (sorry no 4th push guys )and made the first push down now (as predicted) the S&P has made push 2 (as predicted and drawn) and broken the floor at 1634.3, and the Nikkei I have been playing tennis with at the top and bottom of the range for 3 weeks with pinpoint accuracy.

so if this all means nothing, even if I have shown other stuff Im doing along the way too, then really, what is the point? there isn't one. I'll just keep my newfound powers to myself and crack on.

edit. added in. this "post hoc" is BS in fact. it would be post hoc had I not explained in detail prior to what the situation is and which trades I would look for.

"The S&P is in distribution, I would like to short it (1690ish) but it might run up a bit higher yet before it rolls over"

"The Nikkei will make once bounce and then I will short it again at the top of the channel"

PRIOR TO. ..so when I put up a screenshot of a trade, taken perfectly, exactly where and how I previously said I would be taking it, that is NOT post hoc, that is in fact extra evidence of "the doing what he said he was going to do" and the actual doing of it with pinpoint accuracy perfectly. all of which continually slams home my only real claim "It IS possible"

and so is obviously just ignored and derailed instead.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Welcome back - we missed you.

1) You use risk/reward as a ratio present in your betting scheme: you set thing up so you will, over time and on average, only lose 10 units when you lose, but will win 20 units (or more) when you win. That's not it's conventional meaning with investors:

"Risk/reward ratio refers to the relationship between the risk present in a particular investment and the potential reward from the same investment. In general, a riskier investment must offer a greater reward to compensate investors for the increased risk of loss."



2) The recently linked thread shows how obviously wrong your prior predictions on metals (among other things) have been. Why should we pay attention now?

3) Have you established a "real money" account? A lot of us are interested in your one-year performance and would like to mark our calendars. To do that, an opening date and amount would help make your performance claims concrete.

But again, welcome back - I was afraid we had lost you!

 

[Ladewig]

nobody even looks or acknowledges the continual correctness, really, what's the point? "Pearls before Swine" springs to mind.

So. What is the point?

What is the point of you explaining your trading philosophies to people who repeatedly refuse to acknowledge your correctness?
to people who goad you and mock you?
to people who insist on denying your oft-presented facts?

What is the point?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

So. What is the point?

What is the point of you explaining your trading philosophies to people who repeatedly refuse to acknowledge your correctness?
to people who goad you and mock you?
to people who insist on denying your oft-presented facts?

What is the point?

Look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am, look at me, look at how smart I am...

 

[boooeee]

Is there an online service that would allow someone to set up an account trading "fake" money against real stock prices? One that would be publicly shareable?

Kevsta - That's the only way you are going to convince anyone here that you're on to something. Nobody can see the patterns you're seeing, no matter how many charts and arrows you paste here.

But if there were a way to share a demo account that we could all view, but is still tied to real stock prices, you could demonstrate to us all that you know what you're doing. This post hoc stuff is a complete waste of everyone's time.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Is there an online service that would allow someone to set up an account trading "fake" money against real stock prices? One that would be publicly shareable?

Kevsta - That's the only way you are going to convince anyone here that you're on to something. Nobody can see the patterns you're seeing, no matter how many charts and arrows you paste here.

But if there were a way to share a demo account that we could all view, but is still tied to real stock prices, you could demonstrate to us all that you know what you're doing. This post hoc stuff is a complete waste of everyone's time.

What do you think the odds of that happening are? I'd say less than .0000000000000001%.

 

[Samson]

Great thread to bring from hibernation.

I suggest predictions be made here by fundamentalists or chartists.

I suggest oil will trade much lower next week for example.

 

[The Don]

I suggest predictions be made here by fundamentalists or chartists.

I suggest oil will trade much lower next week for example.

Not much of a prediction, I've highlighted the weasel words.

At worst it's a 50/50 bet but because the price only has to dip below the current price at some point in the next week then, given the current volatility it's probably better odds than that.

There's also no indication that you've arrive at this conclusion using technical analysis of past price information as opposed to, say, looking at the Chinese economy and seeing the effect this is likely to have on commodities prices.