Fibonacci levels: myth or reality? - page 14
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Saw 1 a long time ago, but didn't believe it myself)
What do you think, that TA has just now stopped working because the market has changed?
Let's give an exact date, let's celebrate the day TA ceased to work or the day TA usurpation is released )
The other question is, how do you use the fobs?
What do you mean?let's have an exact date, let's celebrate the TA end of serviceability day or the TA usurpation release day )
??? I think I wrote that it never worked in the way it is taught. How can I give a date for the "end of serviceability" ???
Is there nothing wrong with your logic?
??? I think I wrote that it never worked in the way it is taught. How can I give a "end of serviceability" date???
Is there nothing wrong with your logic?
My logic is fine, if it has never worked, then you have to define the boundaries of that very "never", unless of course you are able to prove your opinion that TA is not workable? )
Where is it here about the non-working form in which it is taught?
"What? ))) There's nothing to check there - it's all, like all TA, only works in context.
Why do you think TA has stopped working just now because the market has changed? Right. Exactly the same way it did not work then. The described techniques worked only in the context, which emerged in the trader-professional's head.
So, if you want to test it, first think where you are going to apply it."
I would love to read about the working form TA operates in, teach TA better than it is taught by others, if that's the case )
Do something so as not to be unsubstantiated )
My logic is fine, if it has never worked, then you need to define the boundaries of that very "never", unless of course you are able to prove your opinion that the TA is inoperable? )
I answered your question about the "end date". If you think it is logical to ask about the end date of something that has never started - then I am not your interlocutor.
I don't see the sense to repeat my arguments - a) I wrote a lot about it, b) it's impossible to explain something to a person who is not at ease with elementary logic and, at last, c) why tell me something, if you are interested not in the answer to a question, but in a desire to wrangle.
===
Now you can take offence and call me names. If I were you, I would simply acknowledge the inaccuracy of the question and reword it instead of defending an obvious gaffe.
Saw 1 a long time ago, but didn't believe myself)
And this is the second problem in using Fibo based levels - believe and wait.)) This, by the way, is no joke - manually I, for example, am not capable of doing this.
The first one is clear - to determine the extrema. In some cases it is not even with the extrema, but with the price limits of impulse (in terms of DiNapoli).
I don't know any FA constants, like rates and so on, I associate the word rollers only with wheeled shoes, I am completely unaware of news releases, neither by dates nor importance, and I am in the market for the second five years and use only TA, then it turns out that TA has never worked, and the fact that I have lived with it for so many years is just something I imagined and it is not logical at all.
I have no desire to argue, let alone be offended, I have only one desire - to know the date when the TA lost its capacity to work? After all, until yesterday its performance for me was confirmed daily, so I am logically interested in WHEN did the TA lose performance? Maybe logic is not the problem, and you, not me, need to admit that the gaffe was on your side, otherwise I would like to see the basis for such a serious conclusion.
I don't know any FA constants, like rates and so on, I associate the word rollers only with wheeled shoes, I am completely unaware of news releases, neither by dates nor importance, and I am in the market for the second five years and use only TA, then it turns out that TA has never worked, and the fact that I have lived with it for so many years is just something I imagined and it is not logical at all.
You and I are alike in this - only TA (and a 2nd five year old too, by the way))).
I have no desire to argue, let alone be offended, I have only one desire - to know the date when the TA lost its capacity to work?
Are you even in your right mind? "It turns out that TA has never worked". How can he lose what he doesn't possess??? // Nah, it's crazy with you.
After all, until yesterday its performance for me was confirmed daily, so I logically wonder WHEN did the TA lose its performance?
Are you healthy?
Maybe logic is not the problem, and you, not me, need to admit that the gaffe was on your side, otherwise I'd like the grounds for such a serious conclusion.
Dear, I didn't come here to bicker. Just out of respect for your TASH-ness - read what I have already written not on this thread: here and here.
===
Think at your leisure what you could call such a dialogue: - (I): Never worked. - (you): When did you stop?
It reeks of dope.)))
===
Don't bother answering. I'm not likely to continue the conversation.
You and I are alike in this - only TA (and also for the 2nd five years, by the way))).
Are you even in your right mind? "Turns out TA has never worked". How can he lose something he doesn't possess??? // Nah, it's crazy with you.
Are you healthy?
Dear man, I didn't come here to bicker. Just out of respect for your TASH-ness - read what I have already written not on this thread: here and here.
===
Think at your leisure what you could call this kind of dialogue: - (I): Never worked. - (you): When did you stop?
It reeks of dope.)))
===
Don't bother answering. I'm not likely to continue the conversation.
You and I are not alike, I don't use things that don't work and never have