SebForLiberty Wrote:" The rising price, on volume, signifies more buying than selling pressure and the volume that there is an increase in interest. If little volume accompanied a rise then it would show that there was a lack of buying interest. "

Rising volume also means more people are willing to sell the stock as its price is going highter. If little volume accompanied a rise then it could also show that owners don't want to sell despite of the rising price, which is obviously a good signal.

(2016-05-14, 08:30 PM)kero Wrote:

SebForLiberty Wrote:" The rising price, on volume, signifies more buying than selling pressure and the volume that there is an increase in interest. If little volume accompanied a rise then it would show that there was a lack of buying interest. "

Rising volume also means more people are willing to sell the stock as its price is going highter. If little volume accompanied a rise then it could also show that owners don't want to sell despite of the rising price, which is obviously a good signal.

Imagine yourself: an army penetrates a territory, without encountering the opposite army. Would you say the arriving army is stronger just because there wasn't a battle (yet) ?

Maybee it is. Maybee not. You can't say until both army actually fight.

When you have a volume on a breakout, you know that there is buyers' strongness. If there is not, you don't know. It is not that a breakout/breakdown without significant volume can not succeed. It is that such a breakout/breakdown has less chances to succeed.

All the Weinstein method is about observing a very few indications, which can maximise your chances of success. Volume, sector, and a few other things. You can choose not to consider them, but that will result in more unsuccessful trades.

It's just a matter of probability.

(2016-05-14, 08:49 PM)SebForLiberty Wrote: Yes but the Weinstien method doesn't work as shown by the previous post and the fact there is no proof he made a fortune.

(2016-05-14, 08:10 PM)SebForLiberty Wrote: Yes that's my issue, which one Stan uses ? and what kind of weighted MA is it on the Mansfield charts ?

(2016-05-15, 12:20 PM)malaguti Wrote:

(2016-05-14, 08:10 PM)SebForLiberty Wrote: Yes that's my issue, which one Stan uses ? and what kind of weighted MA is it on the Mansfield charts ?

he makes it pretty clear in his book
on page 25 he says that he was using the mansfield charts, which didn't have what we know as the simple moving average. he didn't have it, he had to use what the mansfield chart had which was weighted. so he's explaining to us why his charts are using a 30week weighted because on page 13 he has very clearly stated that he has found over the years that a 30week average is best for long term investors and 10 for traders using the simple moving average

so just to be as clear as I can he is recommending the use of a simple moving average, but goes on to explain why his charts don't show this, because his charts can't and also explains the downside to the weighted method due its whipsaws, again its stated in the book hence why he has recommended the simple moving average. we should npt be using the weighted moving average if had a choice he wouldn't have done so
this is why we all use the simple moving average

at least it was pretty clear to me. by all means re-read the book

(2016-05-15, 09:28 AM)kero Wrote: I'd add to that, that it looks as the reviewer has a bad understanding of the method. It's not just about working on breakouts/breakdowns, it's about working on breakouts/breakdowns under some very specific conditions. Without considering those conditions, it's obvious that lot of trades are aborted. Which is actually what Weinstein explains perfectly in his book.

(2016-05-14, 11:31 PM)isatrader Wrote:

(2016-05-14, 08:49 PM)SebForLiberty Wrote: Yes but the Weinstien method doesn't work as shown by the previous post and the fact there is no proof he made a fortune.

Seb you can't say that the method does work based on a random amazon review from 2005 and no experience trading it yourself. And plus his newsletter service doesn't work like that as for example in the March 2012 Global Trend Alert Newsletter he highlighted over 37 stocks as potential buys (but to buy only at certain levels or on pullbacks etc) and 24 stocks as potential shorts (again - only at certain levels or on pullbacks, continuations etc). So even people using the newsletter service would only trade one or two of those stocks or maybe none. So there's no way to calculate performance as it's discretionary and not an automated system that tells you what to buy or sell.

Basically, it's just a common sense investing technique, that most people like yourself would find very boring. As to trade the investor method properly, it requires a lot of patience and very few trades a year.

Like I've said to you before. If you are interested in the method, then you need to put the work in and really learn it, instead of spending all your time trying to discredit it, without ever actually learning the method and using it yourself. As this is my personal website, and is for people that want to learn the method and trade in a similar way, so that I can have interesting discussions with them about the method and help each other get better at trading. If that's not what you are here for, then don't post anymore please.

(2016-05-15, 02:08 PM)SebForLiberty Wrote:

(2016-05-15, 09:28 AM)kero Wrote: I'd add to that, that it looks as the reviewer has a bad understanding of the method. It's not just about working on breakouts/breakdowns, it's about working on breakouts/breakdowns under some very specific conditions. Without considering those conditions, it's obvious that lot of trades are aborted. Which is actually what Weinstein explains perfectly in his book.

It looks like you didn't really read the review, he doesn't say it's only a breakout method.

(2016-05-15, 02:08 PM)SebForLiberty Wrote: Ok thank you, i understand, but i don't understand why his newsletter doesn't provide the exact trading plan and positions to take, just like he does for himself, if his performance is really good. I work for a compagny in that field, it is exactly what we do.

I don't find it boring at all, i find it extremely interesting, i'm not kiding, i would love to have the time doing it everyday, actually i hope one day with my associate we can start a blog about investing, we have a plan to do it, that's why we are looking for proof that a method really work, we don't want to give to people bad advices.

I have studied this methode and i'm not a newby without pacience shooting trades randomly, i have myself a very low trading frequency, i'm more a long term investor actually, and i only look at weekly sharts, the daily shart is used only for confirmation signal.

There is a differance between "spending my time trying to discredit it" and simply asking proofs that it works (or not). It's just a fact most trading systems that can be readed in a book don't work, while the very successfull traders and investors don't waste time writing a book, since they don't need to. For now, based on my researches, Peter Lynch is the only one who wrote a book to explain his method and has a proven track record of very hight returns.