Failed forex strategies, opinions and reasoning. - page 7
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
He who does not know how to lose does not know how to win either. But it's always a no-brainer to lose, it's madness.
You have to analyse the reasons for losing every time.
From such losses and analyses is born the knowledge of the nature of the market. And then comes the time for winning. It is so easy to win in Forex, especially in manual trading.
It takes great patience and an analytical mind.
He who does not know how to lose does not know how to win either. But it's always a no-brainer to lose, it's madness.
You have to analyse the reasons for losing every time.
From such losses and analyses is born the knowledge of the nature of the market. And then comes the time for winning. It is so easy to win in Forex, especially in manual trading.
It takes great patience and an analytical mind.
You got it all mixed up and didn't understand what I wrote) A mathematical model can only predict a real stable system, e.g. calculate the trajectory of a rocket to Mars, knowing the initial conditions, and calculate with such precision that the rover will land in the intended square. Mathematical models that are applied to graphs and prices have nothing to do with reality, as it is a work with abstract numbers, which are formed after the fact under the influence of some real processes that are not available to us. Therefore, you are always analysing the plaque on the subject and not the subject itself. In this sense, applying mathematical models to a price chart can be called a kind of technical analysis, which is complete nonsense. If a model is applied to real objective data that leads to a change in price - then it is not nonsense
I'm not confused about anything.)) And let's not land rockets on Mars either - it's clear that deterministic models don't apply to random processes. As an example, take quantum mechanics - we can say absolutely nothing about the behaviour of a single particle, while group behaviour is quite predictable. Market statistical models change slowly enough and on the basis of them and information about the current state it is quite possible to make forecasts about the price movement. And we do not need the distant forecasting horizon - such as where things will go tomorrow or even in an hour. Only here and now).
Well, the particles are in the real world and prices are in the virtual world :) the same analogy, probabilistic estimation works in quantum physics, but in the analysis of quotes it does not work at all or 50/50. Market stat models or stat models built from charts? 2 different things.
confused :) You cannot build a statistical model of the market using a quotes chart, it's like building a statistical model using a lightning curve chart that pierced a cloud on a rainy day.
Well, the particles are in the real world and prices are in the virtual world :) the same analogy, probabilistic estimation works in quantum physics, but in the analysis of quotes it does not work at all or 50/50. Market stat models or stat models built from charts? 2 different things.
confused :) You cannot build a statistical model of the market based on a chart of quotes, it's like building a statistical model of lightning, that pierced the clouds on a rainy day.
We can judge about the market only using charts and other numerical information. This is all that is objectively known and measurable about the market. Considering that we do not possess any secret knowledge, we are left with charts and real-time information, which is probably the only objective information we can rely on.
If the model is applied to real objective data that leads to a change in price - then it's not nonsense - what does that imply? What kind of real objective data is that?
What is this real objective data?
We can only judge the market by the charts and other numerical information we have at our disposal. This is probably all that we know about the market objectively and that is measurable. Considering that we do not have any secret knowledge, we are left with charts and real-time information, which is probably the only objective information we can rely on.
If the model is applied to real objective data that leads to a change in price - then it's not nonsense - what does that imply? What kind of real objective data is that?
Well, economic models, for example, based on different indicators, analysis of supply and demand, market conditions, various arbitrage things, analysis of money supply flows, etc., you can apply mathematical models to that, imho.
But then, without analyzing the data you listed, forex is like a casino where you bet on a coin flip and the next repetition of heads or tails may be considered a trend.
right. and the spontaneous formation of trends, completely random, which may or may not have overdirection a la kondratieff cycles, elliott waves or fractals, and are often determined after the fact
That is why optimisation of parameters works very briefly, and there is no way to understand when a new optimisation is needed and when the market has changed, and it changes instantly under the influence of external factors
Well like what, economic models for example based on various indicators, supply and demand analysis, market conditions, various arbitrage things, money supply flow analysis etc etc, you can apply maths models to that, imho. To all the real objective things related to and affecting the market
Well, it's akin to secret knowledge. )) As it goes: two analysts - three opinions. Oil futures price forecast based on macroeconomic indicators. Are you kidding? I have a 15 minute trade from open to close. Several times a day going long and short. According to your theory we should have all been bums long ago.))
But here's the thing I agree with, TA doesn't help.))