Richard,I have been doing a lot of digging on Gann,and finding reasons to be uneasy.No one has ever been able to replicate his results.His own son gave an interview after his death,where he said Gann never made any millions,and supported his family by selling trading courses.All modern Gann info sellers talk about the time Gann allowed a reporter to see him work the stock exchange,where in 30 days he ran a couple hundred into tens of thousands and had 92% winners.Gann himself never claimed to surpass these results-and I have a couple questions on them.I recently read a biography of Jacob Riis,and learned that most early 1900's New York newspapermen were incredibly overworked and underpaid.Also,if the press then was like some of the modern financial media,the line between straight news and sponsored infomercial gets a little blurry.Is it out of the realm of possibility that the story is,in part,a fabrication?I will continue to dig.Best wishes,Mark.
Well it's clear, isn't it, that there's no definitive line on Gann techniques or any other trading tool, and there's never going to be. If everyone agreed, there'd be no market (edges dry up when everyone can see them). As a result, digging for opinions is rarely going to get you very far. It's like the uncertainty principle: the more specific you can be about what someone did, the less agreement you can find that it was good. So, most everyone thinks Livermore was outstanding because the accounts of what he did were so vague. Meanwhile, ask about the 13-period hull ma on the 2-minute chart and you'll get a variety of answers ranging from religious devotion to raging disdain.
So, my suggestion to anyone interested in Gann is to find whatever info there is on his methods, and try it. It doesn't take long to do, and it's very educational. Don't let yourself be like those people that never get stuff done because they are too busy reading books on how to get stuff done.
I try to think of a technique like an everyday tool around the house. It's not that they work or don't work, so much as they have their own domains of strengths and weaknesses. So, if I need toast, I'm much better off with a toaster than I am with a hammer. If I've got nails to drive, using a toaster isn't going to be very fun.
So if you take any indicator or technique, and are trying it out, try not to think of it as having a win rate like so many consistent losers do. Try to figure out what it says, where it's applicable, and where it's not. In the process, even if you never come back to it, you'll probably learn a lot about the markets.
The following 2 users say Thank You to Richard for this post:
I think it's important to distinguish between astrology and the use of moon phases. The former is very complex, so it might make sense to start with the moon, which has a definite cycle, as well as clear and extremely important effects on the earth. There was a fairly good thread on ET on lunar cycles and trading, started by someone who does know how to trade.
The following user says Thank You to futuretrader for this post:
Good point. Take it a step further which astrology to study? Western, Vedic, Magi, Cosmobiology?
Worth mentioning again, if you are inclined to experiment with the esoteric the Ensign trial is a good place to start.
After one month of intense study, short relatively speaking, Gann mathematics I would definitely plan on keeping. Better stated Pythagorean Theorm. Astro, jury still out.
Lastly I was having a chat with another trader that said whether you believe in Gann or not the Reward to Risk provided from many of the set ups are 3-1 or better. This also goes for another form of market geometry, Andrews Pitchfork.
The following user says Thank You to dandxg for this post: