I got a start as an analyst in emerging markets, and one of the many incredibly useful lessons I learned from my first boss is that the world's normal course is growth. The clearest illustration of the problem was in the emerging markets before things went bad, when economic growth, sales, and profits compounded at double digit rates. There was a high opportunity cost of keeping money tied up in anything that sat like a lump going nowhere. The momentum players' financial physics has some right on its side. Bodies at rest tend to remain at rest, and bodies in motion tend to remain in motion.
Growth stocks are bodies in motion, kept moving by earnings growth and estimate upgrades.
Sitting lumps generally need some impetus to get going - maybe a new business, a recovery or restructuring story, or acquisition speculation. Failure to understand this explains why my early amateur efforts were not successful - for a value strategy to work, there needs to be some idea of the impetus that is going to move the body into motion. Without some impetus or incentive, the very least one can do to mitigate the effects of long lead times and frequent losses is to wait until six months to a year before earnings are expected to bottom out to begin buying. I have written before that value and growth investors also differ on their time preferences. Value investors are hardened realists who are looking for current earnings and tangible assets in the here and now.