Here are some of my thoughts on this topic...
To develop a simple, yet effective (read as profitable), trading strategy takes time, knowledge, and experience. Developing a "simple method" that works is a very difficult thing to do! It is the end result of a very long process. On average, how long does it take for a trader to become consistently profitable? For most traders that eventually succeed, it's years. So I would say that to develop a profitable "simple method" requires one to be "smart".
However, if a "simple method" is defined as using the same old trite indicators in the same old tired way that most traders do, as described in most books, than that won't lead to success either and is not that "smart". Successful traders do not follow
the crowd, they carve out their own path and devise a
unique system that works for them. I also doubt that most successful traders use indicators (operative word here is "most'). But that's a topic for another thread.
On the contrary, a "complex strategy" does not imply that the trader is "smart". I believe most traders make their trading complex because they throw everything, and the kitchen sink, into their strategy thinking that more is better. They do not know how to discriminate between the good and bad information/ideas that's out there. As discussed in another thread, higher education is probably not required to be a successful trader, but intelligence certainly is. To me, being intelligent means being able to learn how to frame out or structure the markets in a way that makes sense (i.e., doesn't appear random or chaotic), filter out the truly useful ideas, and then use a few key ideas in a unique and clever way that allows you to extract money from the markets. More often then not, when discussing most traders at large, a complex strategy usually indicates that the trader is "not so smart". I'll get off my soapbox now.
