|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
They will be part of the MBA programs. I know Wharton is creating a
whole program. And the two MTA professors wrote the book: "A Non Random
Walk Down Wall Street". It is in the MBA programs, though I am not sure
what track. I assume finance. Of course, Tudor has also given money for
a chair I think at the University of Virginia and Henry Pruden runs a
whole program I think either at Golden Gate Univ. or the Univ. of San
Francisco.
---
Steven W. Poser, President
Poser Global Market Strategies Inc.
url: http://www.poserglobal.com
email: swp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tel: 201-995-0845
Fax: 201-995-0846
----- Original Message -----
From: Rajat K. Bose <rajatkbose@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <swp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 2:37 AM
Subject: Re: [realtraders] Tech analysis - waste of time? {02}
> Such articles discrediting TA are published time and again by
> non-practicioners who never delved deep into the subjectand neither
they
> ever will. Their approach is to consider TA in a rather piecemeal
> manner--like taking the Head & Shoulders pattern that too not in its
> entirety--which by no means is not the right approach to investigate
any
> hypothesis or theory.
>
> Initially, while being a fundamental analyst, I too used to dismiss it
in
> the same vein. Now having studied the subject and using it for
professional
> activities I am convinced it has got lot of value and is worth
pursuing.
>
> I have learnt to have an open mind and test any interesting idea
thoroughly
> before dismissing it the way even today TA is being dubbed as useless.
>
> In this context, those who are willing to read such articles and/or
> materials should read the latest and revised edition of Burton
Malkiel's
> 'Random Walk Down the Wall Street' in which the author argues with
renewed
> vigour that both fundamental and technical analyses are useless. He
also has
> his own statistics to bolster his case.
>
> By the Steven, you wrote that Wharton and MIT are about to start
teaching
> TA--when and in which program, could you just let me know?
>
> Rajat K Bose
>
> >From: "swp" <swp@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >Reply-To: "swp" <swp@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx><realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: [realtraders] Tech analysis - waste of time? {02}
> >Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 12:06:07 -0500
> >
> >I have not seen that paper, but the NY Fed has done studies on the
head
> >and shoulders too in the FX markets, and first said that it worked,
and
> >then that it did not. There is a big problem with head and shoulders
> >studies in forex. A head and shoulders is not a head and shoulders if
> >the volume components are not correct, it is not a head and shoulders
> >and that info is not known for the FX market.
> >
> >The Fed's study, by the way, used things that no technician would
call a
> >head and shoulders pattern. I would not be surprised if the same can
be
> >said of this study. And, as I said, without volume, the pattern is
> >almost meaningless.
> >
> >As far as moving averages, that is technical analysis too, so saying
it
> >does not work shows that these folks do not even know what they are
> >trying to disprove. The London School of Economics did a paper years
ago
> >that also showed that moving average systems have positive returns
that
> >could not be possible if TA did not work and if random walk was
correct.
> >
> >Wharton and MIT are set to start teaching TA because they no longer
> >believe in random walk either. These guys are just barking up the
wrong
> >tree. Put them in with others for whom time has passed then by.
> >
> >---
> >Steven W. Poser, President
> >Poser Global Market Strategies Inc.
> >
> >url: http://www.poserglobal.com
> >email: swp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >Tel: 201-995-0845
> >Fax: 201-995-0846
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <RJones2279@xxxxxxx>
> >To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Monday, November 29, 1999 11:31 AM
> >Subject: [realtraders] Tech analysis - waste of time? {01}
> >
> >
> > > Hi RT'ers,
> > >
> > > Read an interesting article here in England in the Investors
> >Chroniclebased
> > > on a paper :"Methodical madness: technical analysis and the
> >irrationality of
> > > exchange rate forecasts"(Economic Journal - Oct 1999)
> > >
> > > Have'nt read the original article but it studied the use of the
> >popular head
> > > and shoulders pattern as a predictor of currency movements( 6
leading
> > > cuurencies against the US $ - 1973 - 1994) and found it to be
> >useless.They
> > > said that where pattern did give good results it may have been
because
> >of
> > > self fulfilling prophecy as so many traders use the technique.
> > >
> > > They said that profits could be bettered by using much simpler
trading
> >rules
> > > - MA crossover or when current price is above recent levels are
two
> >cited.
> > >
> > > Whilst the article studied the H & S pattern specifically the IC
> >intimated
> > > that a large part of tech analysis is a waste of time.
> > >
> > > Any comments?
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob Jones
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
|