lucif (OP)
Sr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
Clown prophet
|
 |
April 28, 2013, 06:36:59 AM |
|
Triangle still here. Almost completed.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
zby
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1592
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 28, 2013, 07:04:17 AM |
|
Triangle still here. Almost completed. How about putting A where you have C? Then the down move now would be B and C would be 200 or something? |
|
|
|
|
Miz4r
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 28, 2013, 08:36:21 AM |
|
Has Lucif even once predicted the price to go up? All I see is down down down from him, even when it went up later. How serious can we take this analysis if the support holds at $120 and we start moving up again soon?
|
Bitcoin = Gold on steroids
|
|
|
lebing
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1288
Merit: 1000
Enabling the maximal migration
|
|
April 28, 2013, 08:40:13 AM |
|
Has Lucif even once predicted the price to go up? All I see is down down down from him, even when it went up later. How serious can we take this analysis if the support holds at $120 and we start moving up again soon?
When we passed 100 or so I think he finally gave up and bought. You can check out the posts a few dozen pages back. That lasted for at least, oh 2 days  |
Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
|
|
|
smoothie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
|
|
April 28, 2013, 09:18:08 AM |
|
All this TA reminds me of voo doo and hocus pocus BS.
If you are here on the forum you ultimately are bullish on bitcoins unless you are working for the FED or other central bank.
|
███████████████████████████████████████
,╓p@@███████@╗╖,
,p████████████████████N,
d█████████████████████████b
d██████████████████████████████æ
,████²█████████████████████████████,
,█████ ╙████████████████████╨ █████y
██████ `████████████████` ██████
║██████ Ñ███████████` ███████
███████ ╩██████Ñ ███████
███████ ▐▄ ²██╩ a▌ ███████
╢██████ ▐▓█▄ ▄█▓▌ ███████
██████ ▐▓▓▓▓▌, ▄█▓▓▓▌ ██████─
▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌
▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─
²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩
▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀
²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`
²²²
███████████████████████████████████████
| . ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM My PGP fingerprint is A764D833. History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA BITCOIN GRIM REAPER SILVER COINS.
|
|
|
|
farfiman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1449
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 28, 2013, 09:35:33 AM
Last edit: April 28, 2013, 09:53:43 AM by farfiman |
|
All this TA reminds me of voo doo and hocus pocus BS.
If you are here on the forum you ultimately are bullish on bitcoins unless you are working for the FED or other central bank.
I agree- true- the sentiments and psychology of people is the same as in any investment area BUT in this very small and not very wide spread market. We can have a swing of 50% in one day due to a whim of a big investor ( or an early adopter ). So all the sophisticated TA is out the window. |
"We are just fools. We insanely believe that we can replace one politician with another and something will really change. The ONLY possible way to achieve change is to change the very system of how government functions. Until we are prepared to do that, suck it up for your future belongs to the madness and corruption of politicians."
Martin Armstrong
|
|
|
|
Bitsaurus
|
|
April 28, 2013, 09:39:38 AM |
|
All this TA reminds me of voo doo and hocus pocus BS.
If you are here on the forum you ultimately are bullish on bitcoins unless you are working for the FED or other central bank.
I agree- true- the sentiments and psychology of people is the same as in any investment area BUT in this very small and not very wide spread market we can have a swing of 50% in one day due to a whim of a big investor ( or an early adopter ). So all the sophisticated TA is out the window. No one person can predict crazy. And I know some of those early coin holders are probably not all right in the head. |
|
|
|
|
arepo
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
this statement is false
|
|
April 28, 2013, 10:33:26 AM |
|
All this TA reminds me of voo doo and hocus pocus BS.
If you are here on the forum you ultimately are bullish on bitcoins unless you are working for the FED or other central bank.
I agree- true- the sentiments and psychology of people is the same as in any investment area BUT in this very small and not very wide spread market we can have a swing of 50% in one day due to a whim of a big investor ( or an early adopter ). So all the sophisticated TA is out the window. No one person can predict crazy. And I know some of those early coin holders are probably not all right in the head. this is a common misconception that has a game theory explanation. take one assumption: barring 'crazy' actors, TA can accurately account for underlying trends in price data. hypothesis: while some traders can be considered 'eccentric', direct manipulation is risky and can often incur loss, and a rational actor with a large sum will make 'TA-appropriate' moves (following from our assumption) to maximize gain. tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average. --arepo |
this sentence has fifteen words, seventy-four letters, four commas, one hyphen, and a period.
18N9md2G1oA89kdBuiyJFrtJShuL5iDWDz
|
|
|
farfiman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1449
Merit: 1001
|
|
April 28, 2013, 10:47:58 AM |
|
All this TA reminds me of voo doo and hocus pocus BS.
If you are here on the forum you ultimately are bullish on bitcoins unless you are working for the FED or other central bank.
I agree- true- the sentiments and psychology of people is the same as in any investment area BUT in this very small and not very wide spread market we can have a swing of 50% in one day due to a whim of a big investor ( or an early adopter ). So all the sophisticated TA is out the window. No one person can predict crazy. And I know some of those early coin holders are probably not all right in the head. this is a common misconception that has a game theory explanation. take one assumption: barring 'crazy' actors, TA can accurately account for underlying trends in price data. hypothesis: while some traders can be considered 'eccentric', direct manipulation is risky and can often incur loss, and a rational actor with a large sum will make 'TA-appropriate' moves (following from our assumption) to maximize gain. tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average. --arepo You don't have to be "crazy" to make the giant swing in price happen. The market is so small that with a "not so big" investment one can do major things. Especially now when big money is starting to move towards bitcoin it is unpredictable what will happen. And the people that have ten's of thousands and up of coins ( early adopters) can do the same at a low cost. Maybe when we have millions trading world wide one will be able to use the TA more effectively. |
"We are just fools. We insanely believe that we can replace one politician with another and something will really change. The ONLY possible way to achieve change is to change the very system of how government functions. Until we are prepared to do that, suck it up for your future belongs to the madness and corruption of politicians."
Martin Armstrong
|
|
|
lucif (OP)
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
Clown prophet
|
|
April 28, 2013, 10:58:26 AM |
|
Triangle still here. Almost completed.
How about putting A where you have C? Then the down move now would be B and C would be 200 or something? "A" requires impulse 5-3-5-3-5 subcount. 5-3-5 there. |
|
|
|
|
elux
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1458
Merit: 1006
|
|
April 28, 2013, 11:37:24 AM
Last edit: April 28, 2013, 02:49:25 PM by elux |
|
tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average.
In the fully general case, this is likely correct. That is: Any fixed strategy to "control" or "manipulate" any market indefinitely will lose, on average, in the long term. However: If this is the case, why does price manipulation need to be prohibited in mature markets? I think we can find very good reasons to assume that manipulation events*, (painting the tape, playing up volume, painting candles near hourly/daily close, decisively breaking resistances, and so on... ) can be very profitable, relative to risk, especially in an immature, unregulated market, especially one with no intrinsic value, especially when trending sideways.
*(Tactical, time-bounded, in pursuit of some definite objective, with a pre-determined failure/stop-loss criterion.) |
|
|
|
|
siulynot
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 28, 2013, 11:44:56 AM |
|
Time to short :p
|
|
|
|
|
Odalv
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 28, 2013, 12:10:09 PM |
|
tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average.
In the fully general case, this is likely correct. That is: Any fixed strategy to "control" or "manipulate" any market indefinitely will lose, on average, in the long term. However: If this is the case, why is price manipulation prohibited in mature markets? I think we can find very good reasons to assume that manipulation events*, (painting the tape, playing up volume, painting candles near hourly/daily close, decisively breaking resistances, and so on... ) can be very profitable, relative to risk, especially in an immature, unregulated market, especially one with no underlying asset, especially when trending sideways.
*(Tactical, time-bounded, in pursuit of some definite objective, with a pre-determined failure/stop-loss criterion.) +1 |
|
|
|
|
arepo
Sr. Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
this statement is false
|
|
April 28, 2013, 12:13:01 PM |
|
tl;dr -- following a trend has a better profit/risk ratio than manipulating a trend, on average.
In the fully general case, this is likely correct. That is: Any fixed strategy to "control" or "manipulate" any market indefinitely will lose, on average, in the long term. However: If this is the case, why is price manipulation prohibited in mature markets? I think we can find very good reasons to assume that manipulation events*, (painting the tape, playing up volume, painting candles near hourly/daily close, decisively breaking resistances, and so on... ) can be very profitable, relative to risk, especially in an immature, unregulated market, especially one with no underlying asset, especially when trending sideways.
*(Tactical, time-bounded, in pursuit of some definite objective, with a pre-determined failure/stop-loss criterion.) +1 i thought this was an excellent post as well and started a new thread split from this one to expand on this topic, for anyone who wants to follow the conversation. -arepo |
this sentence has fifteen words, seventy-four letters, four commas, one hyphen, and a period.
18N9md2G1oA89kdBuiyJFrtJShuL5iDWDz
|
|
|
siulynot
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 28, 2013, 03:19:37 PM |
|
Triangle seems to be braking up
EDIT: maybe retesting Weekly BB
|
|
|
|
|
smoothie
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2492
Merit: 1473
LEALANA Bitcoin Grim Reaper
|
|
April 28, 2013, 03:29:54 PM |
|
Redrawing the lines of the triangle doesn't make it a triangle lol...unless it is a moving triangle.
TA lots of time is skewed towards the bias of the observer.
"it looks like its doing a bearish triangle....yep triangle is still in tact"
"okay here is the new triangle...still in tact"
"triangle?"
|
███████████████████████████████████████
,╓p@@███████@╗╖,
,p████████████████████N,
d█████████████████████████b
d██████████████████████████████æ
,████²█████████████████████████████,
,█████ ╙████████████████████╨ █████y
██████ `████████████████` ██████
║██████ Ñ███████████` ███████
███████ ╩██████Ñ ███████
███████ ▐▄ ²██╩ a▌ ███████
╢██████ ▐▓█▄ ▄█▓▌ ███████
██████ ▐▓▓▓▓▌, ▄█▓▓▓▌ ██████─
▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌
▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌
▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─
²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩
▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀
²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`
²²²
███████████████████████████████████████
| . ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM My PGP fingerprint is A764D833. History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA BITCOIN GRIM REAPER SILVER COINS.
|
|
|
|
siulynot
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 28, 2013, 07:18:40 PM
Last edit: April 28, 2013, 07:34:37 PM by siulynot |
|
Redrawing the lines of the triangle doesn't make it a triangle lol...unless it is a moving triangle.
TA lots of time is skewed towards the bias of the observer.
"it looks like its doing a bearish triangle....yep triangle is still in tact"
"okay here is the new triangle...still in tact"
"triangle?"
http://thepatternsite.com/dt.html  |
|
|
|
|
siulynot
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 28, 2013, 08:12:12 PM |
|
We had a false breakout... triangle still in form. Now better formed though.
|
|
|
|
|
ElectricMucus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057
Marketing manager - GO MP
|
|
April 28, 2013, 08:21:09 PM |
|
Stop it with the triangles already, if a method does fail multiple times it does not make sense to use it again till it works.
|
|
|
|
|
siulynot
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
|
|
April 28, 2013, 08:23:18 PM |
|
Stop it with the triangles already, if a method does fail multiple times it does not make sense to use it again till it works.
Its not the theory which fails, its the application. Triangles need to be redrawn how many times necessary until they make the last form, which should show the characteristics of the breakout. |
|
|
|
|
|
