Not exactly a hot topic but figured I'd add my 2 cents, inspired by something one of the presenters from TopStepTrading said in Tuesday's webinar (to the effect, as much as the industry has tried to turn trading into a science, in his opinion it remains an art). I've suffered through some Leibnitz (in translation, getting an undergrad degree in pure math) and most of what Gann wrote and agree with @Fat Tails' estimation of both. However, to the best of my knowledge Leibnitz was not a trader and Gann not much of a mathematician, so the comparison seems a little apple/orangey to me.
IMO whatever the basis for Murrey Math, as others have pointed out all it does is generate lines on a chart, which is no more and no less than any other method that produces lines (usually interpreted as being indicative of one sort of S/R or another) on a chart. While there is some discussion among believers in one kind of line or another (or in any indicator, for that matter) about why it "works" (meaning, "works as often as not"; e.g., "it works because everybody thinks it works"), and much more debate apparently about how to estimate whether inferred S/R is going to hold, it seems all that matters is what effect a line has on a trader's thought process (or perhaps on the collective consciousness of all traders trading the same instrument at the same time)--how s/he interprets price action in their vicinity--rather than whether they have any intrinsic merit.
As an aside, the issue of objective merit of price action metrics ought to be significant for bot designers, since a computer has no psychology to mess with.
ETA: Should mention it's equally eye opening to apply an indicator one has faith in to randomly generated price data (e.g., NT's Simulated Data Feed).
The following 2 users say Thank You to bnichols for this post:
@bnichols: Well put. Technical Analysis is indeed a collection of fads. Many tools - even a simple trendline - rely on self-fulfilling prophecy. They work as collective meeting points. As you said it is just a line drawn somewhere. A floor pivot, a Fibonacci retracement and a Murrey Math line are born equal, and their usability depends on the number of disciples that they can attract.
The market is more like a jungle, where different species may evolve and disappear. What species is fit to survive depends on the other species in the jungle. A carnivore - trader trapping other traders - relies on a large population of herbivores. The turtle soup trader - setup by Linda B.Raschke - requires that there is a larger population of breakout traders (turtles) that can be hunted and transformed into a profitable soup.
Markets are changing faster than scientific theories, this makes it harder to adapt.
The following 3 users say Thank You to Fat Tails for this post:
Platform: Ninja Trader, Nexgen T-3 Fibs Pro Trader (Love Them!)
Broker/Data: AMP/CQG & Kinetic
Favorite Futures: CL
Posts: 61 since Jun 2010
Thanks: 128 given,
If a bee can't fly, why not bite it?
-Here is the Duck's take on all this:
(1) I love those pretty lines on my charts. If it ain't pretty, I can't trade it.
(2) I know a guy who trades the only the Fibonacci 261.8 extension alla Ken Chow. He uses a plain price bars chart and his fib tool. He makes 200 grand per month with 20 contracts on the ES.
(3) His trading buddy makes 1/2 million per month using the same system with 30 contracts.
(4) My friend quit his wall street job 1 yr ago last month. He is making 25K per day at home using the Nexgen method (Fibonacci) combined with other stuff. He trades 10 contracts on CL, EC, etc.
(5) Horst (er2wizard on this site) does utube vidoes. He made over 20 grand the day after the election using his fib tool. I know a couple of traders who studied with him and more who studied with his mentor. They all use Fibonacci.
Are any of you nay sayers doing that well? I'm not, but I'm studying what these guys are doing and getting better. And, more important, I like the look all that stuff gives to my chart. Do you like the look?
I guess the beauty of his stuff is in the eye of the beholder. There are so many methods that work. Who can comprehend it all? Who's to say what really works? Just remember, the flight experts tell us a bumble bee cannot fly. No way that fat litlle insect can flap those tiny wings and get off the ground. It just doesn't make sense. If he gets off the ground at all, it must be because the wind caught him, right? If that flight faker gets near me, I'm gonna eat him. Bzzzz........Ouch!
The following 2 users say Thank You to Trader Duck for this post:
Sorry to post a reply to a thread that has been dormant for a while. But I just had to voice my thoughts on this subject.
I agree with one blogger that no one indicator can make a person a better trader. But debunking MML so vociferously is a little over the top. There are indicators and there's is MML. In my book, they don't even brook comparison. MML is like a market temperature gauge. You know with just one glance where the market is at.
Besides, there is something very, very intriguing about how Murrey Math is hounded and vilified almost everywhere. There is a disproportionate emotion attached in convincing readers that Murrey Math is a load of crock. I have often wondered why. (Conspiracies notwithstanding! ).
Just my two bits.
@SawViper: Thank you for posting. I always respect a different opinion, as a different opinion is needed to discuss a subject in a serious fashion. Please explain
- the foundations of the method of Murrey Math
- how the method can be used to trade profitably
I have personally recoded a version of the Murrey Math Lines, and in my opinion it calculates an arbitrary range, which is then divided into 8 equal slices. I am not impressed. Also I have not found any useful applciation of those ranges.