Hateful pipsqueak. - page 8
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
There are four articles on the previous page. It will take more than a day to read them and make sense of them. You don't read the articles diagonally.
When you have thought about them, you will decide whether you need to read them or not. If necessary, contact me at s_kucher@hotbox.ru.
https://forum.mql4.com/ru/13925/page7...... then there were two more :))
maybe we should? :)
Thanks for the email..... I'll read the rest, I'll be sure to write..... or maybe not, "as the case may be" )
That's right, only two so far and out of an old student habit I took notes. By the way, how great the divergence worked today on the Eurobucks four o'clock!!!
Here comes the reflection.
And there's no need to take notes. There are no superfluous words in my articles and when you abbreviate, you may lose the meaning. (And you have to return to them more than once - then remember what I said).
Trace the beginning of the execution of divergence signals of higher frames on lower ones. To start with up to M15 inclusive. Later include M5. (See Fractal Relationships).
If you look at the Daily, there is also a divergence. On M15 at the time of the reversal there was what I called a "local" divergence.
You can read a little more about the system at http://forum.profiforex.ru/showthread.php?t=208&page=37 This is the last page. The beginning is somewhere on page 5.
It is not my resource. I appeared there as accidentally as here.
I ask moderators' pardon - I was told here, that it is allowed to give links of other people by subject.
There are four articles on the previous page. It will take more than a day to read them and make sense of them. You don't read the articles diagonally.
When you have thought about them, you will decide whether you need to read them or not. If necessary contact me by e-mail s_kucher@hotbox.ru
Sergiy, could you please tell us how many bars you use to identify the top or bottom of the oscillator and consequently the prices. Does this number of bars depend on the timeframe?
'Hidden Divergence'.
That's where the reflection begins.
You don't need to take notes. There are no extra words in my articles and abbreviating them can lose their meaning. ......
:) many words are missing in your articles..... I have to look between the lines....
SociometryPro, would you please inform me, how many bars you use to identify the top or bottom of the oscillator and prices respectively. Do the number of bars depend on timeframe?
At least this one, for starters....
Despite the declared trading system, as not allowing ambiguous interpretation, there is nothing that indicates the exact moment of "entry-exit" (I emphasize: exact - time of bar forming, the next tick, etc.).
And on the "second" - most of the indicators on the chart (about which, besides the names, nothing is known), do not clarify the picture, but rather confuse it.....
You seem to have forgotten one thing, that people gathered here are MTS-oriented, hence the questions, not always convenient.... about statistics and other things....
Not the easiest system to get, so before taking it on, I want to find out as much as possible.... and analysis of 3-4-5-7 windows, it's out of bounds :(
Judging by the screenshots, you have been using it for over 3 years and it's not clear to the end - with your hands?? ..... and never had the idea to mechanize it?
So don't be offended\te, our brains are so twisted that any statement is immediately tried on an algorithm :)
Sergey, could you please tell me how many bars you use to identify the top or bottom of the oscillator and consequently the prices. Does this number of bars depend on the timeframe?
I said not without reason that the articles will have to be referred to more than once (maybe more than a dozen times). The articles show identification of extrema not by "how many" bars on the frames, but with pinpoint accuracy on Weekly, Daily, H4, etc. "Generic" signals are generated earlier and "accurate" signals are generated 2-3-5 bars before the execution. To begin with, you will have to learn to identify the moment when the divergence (convergence) signal is forming and the moment when it starts to be executed on a rough indicator such as the MACD. It is not difficult, you just have to "include" thinking in this process (i.e. this process is understood).
The system requires a fundamental knowledge of the basics of technical analysis (wave, indicator, trend analysis). Otherwise you should not take the system.
It will take not a day, a week, but probably months to master the system.
The MTS on this system will have to be forgotten (or abandoned) for the time being. At the moment there is not even an elementary divergence indicator for MTS and the members of this forum cannot build it (not because of the difficulty of implementing the algorithm, but because of ignorance and misunderstanding (for now) of how and what signals it should generate). I have highlighted the first point of temporary ignorance above in bold. There are others. One of them will fundamentally change the technical understanding of divergence signals. But all of these can only come consistently (impromptu is excluded).
rider =. there is nothing to indicate the exact moment of "entry-exit"... =
In response to your (somewhere earlier) post, I said that if the entry/exit question is not clarified after several readings, the system should be abandoned (i.e. the reader is not ready to understand it).
=You seem to have forgotten one thing, that people gathered here are MTS-oriented, hence the questions, not always convenient.... about stats and stuff....=
About MTS I said above. The issue of statistics will fall away once you master the system (in one of the posts I said, - are always performed).
= most of the indicators on the chart (about which, besides the names, nothing is known), not so much clarify the picture as confuse it.....=
The learning process is thorny. The basic answers are in the articles. For the beginning of learning, more details will only get in the way.
=...your articles are missing many words..... have to, out of old habit, look between the lines....=
I warned in the articles that some of the issues were deliberately left out as each article deals with a "different" topic.
I've given a link somewhere to another forum. You can find some details there. At the very least it won't hurt.
I am not advertising or distributing the system, but reporting some of the data (information) not available in the literature.
Good luck.
"General" signals are generated earlier, while "accurate" signals are generated 2-3-5 bars before the start of the execution. To begin with, you will have to learn to identify the moment when the divergence (convergence) signal begins to form and the moment when it begins to execute on a rough indicator such as the MACD. It is not difficult, you just have to "include" your thinking in the process (i.e., understand the process).
And if you also take into account that somewhere in one of your posts or articles - "somewhere before" - it was said that MACD is attached to a chart only to show that it is not suitable for determination of trading signals.....
After that, I honestly don't know how to argue further :((..... However, you don't need to, apparently.....
I'm not advertising or distributing the system, but reporting some of the data (information) that is missing in the literature.
"some piece of data" opposition is not tolerated, as a rule...
It is not without reason that I said that we would have to refer to the articles more than once (maybe dozens of times). The articles do not show identification of extrema by "how many" bars on the frames, but with the accuracy of points on the Weekly, Daily, H4, etc. "Generic" signals are generated earlier and "accurate" signals are generated 2-3-5 bars before the execution. First you have to learn to identify the moment when the divergence signal (convergence) and the moment of its execution start on such a rough indicator as the MACD. It is not difficult, you just have to "include" thinking in this process (i.e. this process is understood).
The system requires a fundamental knowledge of the basics of technical analysis (wave, indicator, trend analysis). Otherwise you should not take the system.
It will take not a day, a week, but probably months to master the system.
For this time we will have to forget about MTS according to this system (or refuse from the system). At the moment there is not even an elementary - the divergence indicator for MTS and the members of this forum cannot build it (not because of the difficulty of implementing the algorithm, but because of ignorance and misunderstanding (for now) of how and what kind of signals it should generate). I have highlighted the first point of temporary ignorance above in bold. There are others. One of them will fundamentally change the technical understanding of divergence signals. But all of these can only come consistently (impromptu is excluded).
rider =. there is nothing to indicate the exact moment of "entry-exit"... =
In response to your (somewhere earlier) post, I said that if after a few readings the entry/exit question is not cleared up - the system should be abandoned (ie, the reader is not ready to understand it).
=You seem to have forgotten one thing, that people gathered here are MTS-oriented, hence the questions, not always convenient.... about stats and stuff....=
About MTS I said above. The issue of statistics will fall away once you master the system (in one of the posts I said, - are always performed).
= most of the indicators on the chart (about which, besides the names, nothing is known), not so much clarify the picture as confuse it.....=
The learning process is thorny. The basic answers are in the articles. For the beginning of learning, more details will only get in the way.
=...your articles are missing many words..... have to, out of old habit, look between the lines....=
I warned in the articles that some of the issues were deliberately left out as each article deals with a "different" topic.
I've given a link somewhere to another forum. You can find some details there. At the very least it wouldn't hurt.
Good luck.
So, what do you do before drawing the divergence lines connecting extrema of OsMA, for example, catch points? Or do you wait for the confirmation of the formation of the last extremum?
one bar or two bars?
So before drawing the divergence lines connecting for example the extrema of the OsMA, are you catching points? Or do you wait for the confirmation of the formation of the last extremum
on one or two bars?
I treat all forum participants with respect but the truth is more important.
You, I have particular respect for. At least because you are the only one, who knew about 4 types of signals and didn't bother with the terms.
There are also many nuances of divergence (convergence) signals.
YAZ posted a post where he said he liked Elder's wording better. If you look through my posts you will find the peculiarities of the signals shown by me that Elder could not even suspect.
Now to the substance. I do not draw lines at all. Why? And the proof of signals of higher frames is what is called in the article "Fractal links" as the Rule of Fractal Connection 1. It is also shown in the article "Pivot" in Example 1 (and in all others). I drew lines there to make it clear to the reader what I meant. In Examples 2, 3 I drew lines selectively or did not draw them at all.
In the article you can see that I am waiting for confirmation, but consistently in the lower frames from senior to junior.
For example, the generation of the signal on Daily has begun. This does not mean that its execution will start now, i.e. we should work in the same direction (and the signal continues to form). It will be 2-5 days before the execution. 2-5 bars before the execution the signal will start to form on H4 (continue to work in the same direction), then on H1, M30, etc. Eventually the signals will be formed on all the frames simultaneously, this is the exact moment of reversal (which I demonstrated in example 1 of "Pivot" article). So there is more than enough confirmation with consistent refinement. But it is very difficult (and even impossible for many people) to work only on divergence (convergence) signals. Therefore the system applies a complex analysis (wave, oscillatory and trend analysis), which visualizes the market situation, where you can see where the wave structure begins/ends, the correction on the "small to large" frames.
In v. "Indication..." you almost never see lines.
In my article "Flow..." (a new reader not familiar with my system) I showed lines on the first two charts what is a local divergence and a local convergence. In the body of the article I provided one chart with lines to explain superficially the interpretation of signals. The rest will not care).
I deal with detailed writing now because most programmers have problems with tehanalysis.
rider =And if you also take into account that somewhere in one of your posts or articles - "somewhere before" - it was said that MACD is attached to the chart only to show that it is not suitable for identifying 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.