As a chartist I understand that chart movements are the result...

As a chartist I understand that chart movements are the result of all players in the market - including computers. I don't rely on any indicators (perhaps a passing interest in RSI from time to time!) but other traders use them and if that works for them so be it. What I will say is that the text book trading processes I was originally taught no longer seem to work as well as they should and perhaps that is because too many others market players (and computer algorithms) try to out-think those following the text book approach.
Anyway, I've found that just chasing certain patterns in medium to large companies seems to work for me most of the time providing I get the right mix of charting art and science.
IMO indicators only tell me what has happened not what is going to happen (well not reliably enough for me), whereas the charts alone give me a pretty good idea of where a stock's price is going in the short to medium term. That said, with charting there is always at least one alternative view and its very subjective weighing one probability against another. This is where chartists are often misunderstood or accused of having a 'bet both ways' whereas indicators are more cut and dried in their predictions (and anyone can interpret them whereas it takes years to become proficient at charting.
And like your indicator, charting works much better with hindsight - but that doesn't put much money in the bank.