a trading strategy based on Elliott Wave Theory - page 110
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
I wonder why you have so many variants for the same situation?
I wonder why you have so many variations for the same situation?
I have all channels calculated on each bar, so a difference of two bars changes the pattern. The last picture was chosen closer to the time in Vladislav's picture.
I find it by a formula, which I got from Yurixx, like 10 pages ago, for 100 kopecks of thanks :). When you calculate this formula you need to find the variance of X and Y, I divide it by (N+1). If you divide it by something else you get very different results, it's hard even to find the limits of the channels on the chart :)
ZS And you are using data from which server the last figures were given?
Your quotes are normally superimposed on Vladislav's quotes, but mine do not want to (the same pattern, but the time scale is different in different parts), it seems my broker is cheating :), or maybe it's because of the strange period of 31, but I just do not know how to quickly get the data to a certain date, I get using the script StepByStep
Eugene ! I declare a categorical protest! You're violating copyright!
The formula I've secretly sold you must be divided by N, not by (N+1) or (N-1).
Stop mocking the author, divide it properly. :-)
In the formula I secretly sold you, you should divide by N, and not by (N+1) or (N-1).
Stop mocking the author, divide it properly. :-)
:) how did I violate them? Reference to the source is, but how to count the variance was my problem, I am guilty only of not thinking that N for you and for me a little different things, I understand that generally accepted N is the number of degrees of freedom (number of measurements, tests, outcomes, etc.), while for me N is the number of bars counting from 0. Bar 0, and measurements 1, and here we have a disagreement :).