The definitive TA does not work thread

[Anonymous No.57131912]

So tired of you mongoloids. In this thread I will present very simple, irrefutable logic as to why TA is a meme. I want to note up front that I am happy to debate the logic, but if you find yourself reading through this and can not FOLLOW the logic, that is because you are a STUPID person, which is the underlying root of why you believe in TA. And if you can't offer an intelligent argument against it and just write something like "brainlet argument" it's a clear sign you don't understand and fall into the stupid category.

So first we have to define what "works" means. I think we can safely agree that "works" in this context means:

>Allows you to trade profitably greater than 50% of the time

We should be able to agree on this because if it means anything other than that, then the majority of your trades are losses and I don't see why anyone would think losing money is a successful trading strategy.

Next, we have to understand one simple fact: A trader that can reliably profit more than 50% of the time now has access to infinite money creation, where the only limitations in terms of how quickly you generate wealth are set by:

> Total % of trades profitable above 50%
> Initial investment
> Total # of profitable trade opportunities on the market at any given time

I think we can all agree that a 50.0000001% success ratio is not very appetizing since the hours and hours you'd spend to get what is essentially a 50/50 win ratio would not be worth it for most people, but let's just say this is what TA gets you.

Even at such a low +% profitable, your limitations are still only capital & market potential.

Without any doubt, if you could prove that you can reliably generate profitable trades the majority of the time, capital would not be hard to come by. There are plenty of billionaires, corps, funds, etc. who would be happy to throw you money if you could guarantee them profit of any amount because even at such a low w/l ratio...

[Anonymous No.57131915]

>>57131912
There are thousands (if not millions) of market opportunities at any given moment, and profits can be made from any type of momentum (downward, upward, sideways). So really, ultimately, if TA works then every single possible asset is a profitable opportunity and there is likely no amount of money you could put in which would limit you. There are quadrillions in assets.

If TA worked, you could program the "science" of it into something that could easily scale it out across as many trades as you please, and given that it unlocks infinite wealth then the richest people in the world would be those who practice TA.

It would fundamentally break all markets unless kept a very hidden secret. And if it was a very hidden secret, you retards wouldn't be here with your diagrams.

And that's all there really is to it. I would venture a guess that TA does not help you predict market outcomes, and in fact like most traders you are more than likely to lose to index funds long term, and probably have a high probability of losing money outright.

> You only need one big trade, not a high % of winning trades!

So, you're playing the lotto then hoping for a winning ticket? That's not a strategy that works, it doesn't prove TA works. If anything, it proves it doesn't.

[Anonymous No.57132005]

>>57131912
you can be profitable even with a 30% winrate, you absolute faggot

[Anonymous No.57132017]

>>57132005
You are in the STUPID camp. Congratulations.

[Anonymous No.57132109]

>>57132005
I'm just going to shred you as a warning to other stupid people who think about responding. It's nothing personal, as I know it's not your fault you are stupid - likely a combination of your genetics and education, neither of which you had any say in. But you were first so you will be the example.

First off, you either did not understand or did not read:

"
> You only need one big trade, not a high % of winning trades!

So, you're playing the lotto then hoping for a winning ticket? That's not a strategy that works, it doesn't prove TA works. If anything, it proves it doesn't."

But I will expand on your argument anyway. Being profitable =/= a profitable system. A lottery player who plays once and wins money is profitable, but the lottery is undeniably not a system for generating wealth statistically (mathematically) for most (the vast majority of) people.

Similarly, a 30% win rate, while perhaps ending in profit for some small subset of people, will reliably mean you lose all of your money at some point. If you keep utilizing the same system that got you your 30% win rate, even if at one point in time you were profitable, you will eventually lose everything. This is simply because 7 out of 10 trades are losses and you can not control which, so for every 1 big profitable trade you make, at some point you are likely to make not just one equal sized loss, but 3.33. You will, mathematically speaking, lose your money very fast if you consistently trade on a 30% win rate system. Yes, some people will beat the odds, but most will not.

This therefore proves to be a system that doesn't function or yield profits as a result of the system itself, so proves ultimately TA does not "work".

Unless of course TA can bend the very basic functionalities of the universe, and change how math functions itself, which it can not.

Regardless of whether you didn't understand or simply didn't read and replied anyway, you are stupid. That's why you think TA works.

[Anonymous No.57132178]

TA works tho

[Anonymous No.57132196]

>>57132178
Bait reply

Also I know no one will come here with a logical argument because these things are just objective truths, my main purpose is to help save some non stupid people some time. It doesn’t make you stupid to get sucked in to TA by some influencer retard or dumb sites like stocktwits but if you have any intelligence eventually you’ll realize it’s all a meme. Hopefully this fast tracks that for some of you, especially younger people.

The sheer lack of replies here from TA fanatics should be enough.

[Anonymous No.57132210]

>>57132196
>look at chart
>dont buy the top or sell the bottom
>sell the top and buy the bottom instead thanks to TA
>Profit

really simple

[Anonymous No.57132238]

>>57131912
>we can safely agree that "works" in this context means:
>Allows you to trade profitably greater than 50% of the time
cope.

[Anonymous No.57132294]

>>57132238
See
>>57132109
You are in the STUPID camp.

Next.

[Anonymous No.57132296]

>>57132294
cope

[Anonymous No.57132299]

also to this anons point:
>>57132005
if I take out a bunch of fluff trades I made when testing out a new platform, my winrate is closer to 40% with no change in PnL. On forex, it's 60%. And equities, 30%. Profitable on all, but most profitable on crypto. Winrate is important, but so is RRR.

[Anonymous No.57132317]

i love your autistic mechanical destruction of TA. thank you OP

[Anonymous No.57132340]

>>57131912
you will face much resistance (no pun intended) but congrats fighting these retards

[Anonymous No.57132367]

>>57132109
>you will eventually lose everything
not with proper risk management. No one in their right mind is going out here and swinging 10% of their stack in risk every trade. There's a bit of bob and weave to it but generally speaking you size bigger when you're hot and size down when cold - but either way you never size *too* big. picrel, 9 losses in a row in 2022, total loss? 2% of my net capital. I knew I was on a cold run trying to find my rhythm again, so the losses stayed small. No big deal.
Obviously this is about more than TA alone, TA doesn't tell you anything about risk management. It's just a tool to structure positions that fit within a risk management framework.

[Anonymous No.57132368]

>>57132299
See
>>57132109
You are in the STUPID camp.

This ONE argument which I already refuted in the OP is the ONLY thing you people can say? Three separate retards now who don't understand high school level statistics - the MOST basic lesson that is basic W/L ratio and how that plays out over time. This is the BEST you can do? REALLY?

Well, I'm going out now. Has been fun, I am sure some smart anons will take a valuable lesson here. The three retards of course aren't going to get anything but that wasn't the goal.

And bait guy, thanks for joining.

>>57132317
>>57132340
Yea I don't intend to keep it up, the OP is enough for anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together. Cheers, gents.

[Anonymous No.57132388]

>>57131912
Ok fine TA doesn't work. Lets focus on the news then...
The news said that BlackRock ETF will pump everyone in early Jan. But this means of everyone is bullish, then the whale will dump

What should i do OP?

[Anonymous No.57132405]

>>57132367
Ok ONE last reply because I WAS anticipating the

>risk management

retard response. There is a very simple answer here which is that risk management is just a part of your (now SLIGHTLY more complex) system. If you could reliably extract your definition of "risk management" and build the system, then we're back at square 1 where essentially you have the infinite money glitch. But this isn't true, is it?

>Risk management

Is almost as much as a meme as TA without it because it implies you always know when to cut losses and when to let winners run, which you of course do not, nor does anyone else.

Anyway, you either have to consider risk management systems as part of your overall TA trading system, or you have to call it a separate system in which case it stands to be argued even if "risk management" works, TA does not.

But really, I'm out now. Do appreciate you bringing the only other possible cope here to the table.

[Anonymous No.57132411]

You know what, there's this group of anons who like yo post TA threads daily. Then to counter it you people should post a non TA price prediction too, at least weekly since no TA means chart is 100% solely on news and happenings

[Anonymous No.57132438]

>>57132405
>gets BTFO
>runs away
kek typical

[Anonymous No.57132450]

>>57132109
I agree with you that TA is nonsense but this is not a good argument. In gambling (and trading is gambling) win rates are absolutely irrelevant in determining the profitability of a bettor, what matters is EV. If someone offers you a bet where you will lose your entire investment 80% of the time but 6x it 20% of the time you take that bet everytime.

[Anonymous No.57132453]

>>57132368
The way you type is extremely emotional and disingenuous. Extremely cringe, run of the mill bait thread. I will leave on this note:
Yes, there are ways to trade profitably over time. Most people are better off buying spot low, and selling high. And yes, that's trading too (just on a longer timeframe) - but given the probability of success and potential RRR, it's probably the best risk adjusted trade you can make. And for that reason, 80-90% of my capital goes into spot longs. inb4 more emotional baiting, cope and seethe as I silently profit

[Anonymous No.57133472]

>>57132450
Umm anon if you want to talk gambling you should just remember the phrase “the house always wins”, which stems from the fact that anons point is exactly that statistical probability of winning is what leads to winning. You think you have figured out how to gamble profitably long term? Lol. Go to a casino and test it out. This is a cope post that just proves OP more correct

>>57132453
TA has nothing to do with the fact that over time markets go up. You don’t need TA to buy an index fund and hold, anon. What kind of a dumb argument is this?

[Anonymous No.57133745]

>>57133472
nah you're extremely dumb. as the anon pointed out, its all about EV. you're not going to find a +EV situation in casino, trader's thesis is that you can find +EV spots in trading, and thats possible even in situations where you have less than 50% chance to win.

he explained it just about as simply as possible, if you cant comprehend then just move on or maybe pick up poker so you can try to understand what EV is