“In order to prove that ‘predicted technical analysis does not work’ , we need to define ‘predicted technical analysis’ and ‘work’. Does the common technical phrase ‘a flag always flys at half mast’ mean that if you happen to pick the right breakout from the flag and it travels exactly as high as the run-up to the beginning of the flag, then I guess it ‘works’, depending on your measurements and of course adjusting for a little bit of slippage and such, and you know if it comes within 1 point of your target well that’s close enough, right? Or maybe it’s that 5th wave in the Elliot wave format that pushed up exactly 0.618x the length of the 1st plus the 3rd wave, or is it just the 3rd wave, I forget? Oh yeah that head and shoulders, you know that’s a sure winner because when that breaks down from the right shoulder you know for sure that the market will dive to the exact length of the measurement from the base to the peak of that head and shoulders. Oh yeah, I just love trading the support and resistance bands because they are always spot on – so predictive like shootin fish in a barrel. This is why trading is so blessed easy it almost pains me to take so much money this way- you know that MACD, it’s like reading tomorrows Wall Street Journal – yeah there’s no way you’ll ever prove this stuff doesn’t work, I mean just look out your window there are guys and girls drivin Ferraris all over the world because of all the riches they have claimed from predictive technical analysis. Good luck with this one – oh hang on a sec, I’ve gotta take this call from Nostrodamus, he’s gonna tell me what orders to place Monday morning. Just another narrow minded jack ass [here].”
The reader who originally wrote in with the ‘jackass’ comment saw the above response and responded:
“Your response to my comment that you are a narrow minded jackass not only reinforces my belief but tells me that you are also delusional. I recommend you see a Psychiatrist.”
This subject appears exhausted!