Indicators are like playing roulette - page 3
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
questions like that are far above me, as they are for those who call themselves "economists", since you cant get any of them to agree with anything.
but that forex has a direction, even though news and events will temporarily move it about like a sail driven boat in rough seas, is proveable by forex and the boat both arriving at its destination no matter how hard the buffetting.
if this were not true, banks would NOT be able to place longer term trades and observation of where these trades lie, with their TP points, proves the banks already know where the money is heading (especially since they control it)
i am a trader and as such i cannot deal in the "theoretical" but must remain grounded in the "here and now" and the future as expressed by available trends, otherwise i may as well trade football cards !
Please think.İf forex has a real logic can we imagine any economy.
hi
forex is like go find your treasure's game, it needs knowledge to find the treasure:)
===================
Forex Indicators Collection
AGREED Prasxz --- KNOWLEDGE and EXPERIENCE indeed, and thats how we play this wonderful game !
once you have those qualities, the market is a simple game to enjoy as you wish -- I wish more understood the simple truth of your statement !
and for me, indicators are a VERY important part of the game !
enjoy and trade well
mp
forex is like go find your treasure's game, it needs knowledge to find the treasure:)
===================
Forex Indicators Collectionwhile this is similar, but worded much differently than what i responded to, I will have to state that its pure DRIVEL and proveable to be drivel.
How much would you pay if i were to knock off the top price of a FUTURE MOVE and do it every single day and since its not a wonderful trick, but simply decent trading, ive taught it to many others who do it themselves now !
i do it consistently and have been told (i rarely watch) that my hit rate is 100% in 6 months of doing it.
lately on what i call the "overnites" (trading that takes place AFTER 1:30 and ends at 8am, edst while im sleeping) i have had to resort to a shorter timeframe, such as the 60 or 90 minute, as it just takes too long for the H4 as of late, with what used to be done by 10am, now taking up to the rollover.
BUT, nevertheless, PRICES AND MOVEMENT can be predicted with at least 90% accuracy as long as time is figured in, and my record of 100% still stands, if i remember correctly !
BUT without anything else, the argument is flawed by FORCING us to accept that the SL and the TP would be the same number of pips --- THAT simply does NOT exist in real life, so while theory may be a wonderful socratic exercise, it has NO BEARING ON REALITY !
for instance, while I warn non experienced traders to not follow my ideas, i trade with NO SL --- how on earth would i FIT into that "theoretical" model ?
mp
for instance, while I warn non experienced traders to not follow my ideas, i trade with NO SL --- how on earth would i FIT into that "theoretical" model ?
It fits into a theoretical model very easily. I dont particularly like Igors equal SL/TP constraint on the test, I understand why it wants it there, but in practical terms why burden yourself with unrealistic constraints that are not required.
In simple terms, you can compare the performance of trading systems, by comparing the distributions of gains and losses. Adding some indicator either does nothin, or it leads to a change in the distribition of gains and losses, either for better or worse.
Actually removing the stop and target constraints is quite sensible during testing cos it lets you test the thing you wanna test, without the results being undulty influenced by external factors. Otherwise you end up with Igors rather good horse race analogy.
WONDERFULLY explained zupcon --- thank you
mp
It fits into a theoretical model very easily. I dont particularly like Igors equal SL/TP constraint on the test, I understand why it wants it there, but in practical terms why burden yourself with unrealistic constraints that are not required.
Great heated and entertaining discussion!
I will not claim to have an answer to the questions or statements posted in this thread. All who have been in the game of forex, and put in their time and effort, will no doubt have their set opinions. With that said, I will give you mine.
Personally, like many on this forum, I have been involved in a long search to create an EA that will perform with some degree of accuracy. I first had to teach myself how to code, having no prior experience. Through this mind blowing experience I have tried not all, but many of the indicators to create such a system. After years, coding and testing just about every indicator combination I could think of, I arrived at a personal conclusion. While some indicators can show a basic trend, they all don't really help you predict ANY type of future price movement. Maybe some kind of probability, but never a probability with any measurable degree of consistent accuracy.
The reason we all look to indicators is to try and help us predict the future. What I have found is, indicators give you a false sense of the future. I have created many systems, FORWARD tested them, and have finally come to the conclusion that indicators are not the answer I am looking for.
Continuously searching for the answer to consistent positive results.
-wolfe
STFU,
Shut up or put up, Open your account. Again just incase you can't read.
while this is similar, but worded much differently
than what i responded to, I will have to state that its pure DRIVEL and proveable to be drivel.
How much would you pay if i were to knock off the top price of a FUTURE MOVE and do it every single day and since its not a wonderful trick, but simply decent trading, ive taught it to many others who do it themselves now !
i do it consistently and have been told (i rarely watch) that my hit rate is 100% in 6 months of doing it.
lately on what i call the "overnites" (trading that takes place AFTER 1:30 and ends at 8am, edst while im sleeping) i have had to resort to a shorter timeframe, such as the 60 or 90 minute, as it just takes too long for the H4 as of late, with what used to be done by 10am, now taking up to the rollover.
BUT, nevertheless, PRICES AND MOVEMENT can be predicted with at least 90% accuracy as long as time is figured in, and my record of 100% still stands, if i remember correctly !
BUT without anything else, the argument is flawed by FORCING us to accept that the SL and the TP would be the same number of pips --- THAT simply does NOT exist in real life, so while theory may be a wonderful socratic exercise, it has NO BEARING ON REALITY !
for instance, while I warn non experienced traders to not follow my ideas, i trade with NO SL --- how on earth would i FIT into that "theoretical" model ?
mpwhile this is a bad site for me to not salute EA's, one has to understand that one needs to LEARN to trade long before they learn to code --- once you find a satisfactory methodology, THEN you attempt to codify it, not the other way around.
Personally, short of "big blue" or a team of Crays, i dont think these little EA's can challenge a decent manual trader who understands the workings of the market, but if one allows for how the market works, which takes more time than you can imagine unless you have a VERY GOOD teacher, you can come close.
you must understand that the market is NOT as random as some might state, but works within support and resistance, trends, alternating time zones that reverse the direction but not necessarily the trend and a few hundred other general rules that most newer traders simply dont even know exist !
if these things did not exist, trading and EA's would be simple and profitable, but we deal with stop losses that get hit, even though the trade WAS correct, interday price reversals that you can set a clock to and the ability to recognize support and resistance areas and trends within trends within trends.
ALL of this is learnable, but how much can be transferred to a small EA remains for me to see happen --- some day, like in chess, forex will be "tradeable" successfully by computer alone, but i believe its a while off yet ---
essentially you should design an EA to work in ONE type of market and it would probably be up to you to determine WHEN youre in that market or not.
the top winners in the EA contests are TUNED only for the contest requirements and i remember one winner that simply rode a long term run (cad if i remember correctly) buying the dips and moving onwards through compounding, BUT the creator HAD TO FIND THE CURRENCY PAIR TO PLAY, not the EA !
i personally feel that most EA/s would work better if they simply allowed MUCH higher drawdowns, as any trend aligned movement in forex has its ups and downs which tend to be where the EA stutters and loses --- take a good look when testing and see how many lost positions because of small SL's actually go on to recover fully and produce profit.
Forex is an instrument that seeks to move from major support to resistance and then back again --- unfortunately, in the middle of the movement, it looks for all the world as if its gotten drunk and starts weaving and bobbing, moving up and down, BUT INVARIABLY GETS BACK TO IS SUPPORT if it left RESISTANCE ---- you can prove this to yourself any day of the week by simply LOOKING AND WATCHING.
then, believe it or not, there are indicators that CAN be of major assistance with trend development, but they have to be teamed with the remainder of the knowledge to use correctly.
as i write this i begin to wonder at some of my thoughts, because if you can clear up the drawdown issues, once the price starts its trend move, it has to pay off (as long as the drawdowns dont break you first) and its beginning to become scary !
enjoy and trade well
mp
Great heated and entertaining discussion!
I will not claim to have an answer to the questions or statements posted in this thread. All who have been in the game of forex, and put in their time and effort, will no doubt have their set opinions. With that said, I will give you mine.
Personally, like many on this forum, I have been involved in a long search to create an EA that will perform with some degree of accuracy. I first had to teach myself how to code, having no prior experience. Through this mind blowing experience I have tried not all, but many of the indicators to create such a system. After years, coding and testing just about every indicator combination I could think of, I arrived at a personal conclusion. While some indicators can show a basic trend, they all don't really help you predict ANY type of future price movement. Maybe some kind of probability, but never a probability with any measurable degree of consistent accuracy.
The reason we all look to indicators is to try and help us predict the future. What I have found is, indicators give you a false sense of the future. I have created many systems, FORWARD tested them, and have finally come to the conclusion that indicators are not the answer I am looking for.
Continuously searching for the answer to consistent positive results.
-wolfe