Hateful pipsqueak. - page 9
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 treat all forum members with respect, but the truth comes first.
rider =And considering that somewhere in one of your posts or articles - "somewhere before" - it was said that the MACD is attached to the chart only to show that it is not suitable for detecting trading signals.....=
I showed that as a divergence indicator it is "dumb" compared to MACD_H (OsMA). If you don't believe me, check it out. But it is an excellent trend indicator (given its features).
=After that, honestly, I don't know how to argue further.... You don't need it though, apparently..... "some data" opposition is not tolerated, as a rule...==
I don't care at all whether someone opposes it or not. I am not asking for advice. I am offering unique materials for review. Who wants new knowledge will try to get it, who does not want it - its a private matter.
Good luck to opponents and supporters.
I treat everyone with respect :)))
And especially people like you, who are capable of generating such ideas.... I also envy them a little. Except that if the "programmer-theanalysis" problem is solved quite simply and quickly, then the other one: "generator-technological task", apparently, is insoluble in principle. :)
In one of your posts, you said (unquote) that the wave analysis was only for those who find it difficult to trade on divergences.... my version is the opposite: it is much easier without waves (subjective), on divergences.... i am just trying to understand the rules: "entry-exit" ....
I respect everyone :)))
And especially people like you, who are capable of generating such ideas.... I also envy them a little. Except that if the "programmer-theanalysis" problem is solved quite simply and quickly, then the other one: "generator-technical task", apparently, is insoluble in principle. :)
In one of your posts, you said (unquote) that the wave analysis is only for those who find it difficult to trade on divergences.... my version is the opposite: it is much easier without waves (subjective), on divergences.... i am just trying to understand the rules: "entry-exit" ....
That's not what I said. I said (literally): - "But it is very difficult (and even impossible for many people) to work only on divergence (convergence) signals. That's why the system uses complex analysis (wave, oscillator and trend analysis),".
Compare my expression and yours.
It seemed to me that for most programmers it is the 'programmer-theanalysis problem' that is unsolvable.
Analyze soberly familiar to you thread 'Hidden Divergence'. There is a comedy there, not a discussion of the issue of thechanalysis.
And the problem of "generator-technological task" is solved without any problems.
The article "Inline Analysis..." demonstrates the practical work of the complex analysis system on a specific day, in a specific real market, with the consistent operational solution of the tasks faced by the trader. And, mind you, with the precise determination of what will happen in the market at the next moment.
But the programmers do not want to (or cannot?) see and understand this.
I didn't say that. I said (literally): - "But it is very difficult (and even impossible for many people) to work only on divergence (convergence) signals. Therefore, the system uses a complex analysis (wave, oscillatory and trend analysis).
Compare my expression and yours.
It seems to me that it is the 'programmer-theanalysis problem' that is intractable for most programmers'.
Analyze the thread 'Hidden Divergence' soberly familiar to you. There is a comedy there, not a discussion of the issue of thechanalysis.
And the problem of "generator-technological task" is solved without any problems.
The article "Inline Analysis..." demonstrates the practical work of the complex analysis system on a specific day, in a specific real market, with the consistent operational solution of the tasks faced by the trader. And, mind you, with the precise determination of what will happen in the market at the next moment.
But programmers do not want to see and understand this (or can't?).
:) let it be "verbatim" ..... and if you remove the wave analysis? .... rules will be? :).... I will look at "flow analysis" - carefully and very carefully... then I will reply, here or in private.
As for "hidden divergence", there's no comedy schizophrenia there: there's an attempt to understand the basis of why the 9-21-5 (right? :) "mashes" work so well, and where those numbers ultimately stem from. You, for all your acdemically competent style of presentation, have never clarified this question..... agree that so many
of graphs can be pulled from anywhere and anytime, but the "static advantage" of this particular type of trading - it hardly grows on nothing..... so clarify.... it's simple, if you have a systematic trade: number of trades/day..... % winning/% losing.... etc. - tester report as template.... no one is asking for documentary proof, and you don't need it "with the current level of printing development" :)....
Just by your mere statement that it works "always", you have already raised a wave of mistrust..... "always" is something close to eternity, not for us..... do you have no losing trades at all?
I'm close to your position on the points about "mythical" content of support and resistance levels, about the fact that FA and news, if they have any influence on the market, it's very short-term..... only I also really want to know how to calculate this last "exhaustion impulse" - and if 9-21-5, so wonderfully shows it, then why? )
By the way, or not, I don't know, but in the attachment is an indicator (universal) - works on any and with all TFs.... the main market movements clearly shows.... try to put it on your own charts, and after that, pick up divergences under it....
YAZ posted a post where he said he liked Elder's phrasing better. If you look through my posts you will find the peculiarities of signals that Elder could not have even suspected.
You have to take into account that Elder works on large periods
You characterize these signals as "which Elder does not suspect" - perhaps to Elder they are just noise
and he doesn't pay attention to them.
I think Elder knows what divergence is and what convergence is.
On the chart right now is the current market situation with your "universal indicator". And you propose to work with this lagging and redrawing stuffed animal?
About 1.5-2 years ago a beginner stated at the forum that the ZigZag indicator indicates the reversal more precisely than the MACD. I replied that it does indeed.... but only on history.
If you notice on the chart - the price went up a long time ago, and where is your Zigzag? And then think about its "usefulness".
And this is a further situation. And what about the indicator?
This is the art of programmers without thechanalysis.
Either you don't want to listen or what you said is wrong.
No need to try to trade with this lagging "stuffed animal".... he was never positioned that way.
Not interested in the "current" one anymore ..... let's look at the history, shall we?
All I asked for is to put it on your charts (history, history) in any combination of timeframes and pick up diverters-cockers under it, so that it fits with your system-..... and preferably not once but several times. And words are not necessary here - smart screenshots are enough.
Прошу меня извинить, - я забыл предупредить, что в сети есть не все мои статьи, а только те, материалы по которым демонстрировались на выставке.
Это "Фрактальные связи", "Разворот", "Индикация разворотов в системе", "Разворотная волна".
Есть еще заметка "Поточный анализ и прогнозирование рыночной ситуации", экспромтом написанная для форума волновиков, как напоминание, что не волновым анализом единым...
В качестве индикатора дивергенции я использую известный всем OsMA, точнее его полный аналог с некоторыми прибамбасами FX5_Divergence с некоторыми изменениями, и то только потому, что он "симпатичнее" выглядит. (По нему я оставил заметку в "Чудо индикатор"). Параметры 9,21,5 являются компромиссом между точностью и чувствительностью. Лучшего индикатора мне найти не удалось, да это и не требуется. При таких параметрах он генерирует (наряду с другими) очень важные сигналы, которые в ст."Разворот" я назвал сигналами "локальной" дивергенции.
Good afternoon. Can you tell me where I can find such an indicator with filters?
Thank you.)
Good afternoon. Can you tell me where I can find such an indicator with filters?
>>Thank you.)
Thank you generously of course!) And where can I find filters like on page 6 post: 05.07.2008 13:55 figure 2 ?
Psychology rules the market. Wave Theory rules, but it's just changed,
the theory mimics the market. Doesn't mean Elliott Theory is dead,
it's just waiting for its Lenin-Stalin.