Breaking through the morning flat - page 21
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
But please don't stoop to the kindergarten level of "you're a fool". In science, there is a presumption of guilt - if a method has not been scientifically proven to work, then it does not work. Moreover, it has not only been proven, but also double-checked by other researchers. Do you want to be operated on by a doctor using some fancy method that has no proof that it works, or would you prefer something less fancy, something that has been tested a thousand times?
I'm fine with the option of not having to prove anything.
--I'm more inclined to the idea that trading is unlikely to have anything in common with an exact science, where everything has to be very clearly formulated and proven...
rather we can talk about the likelihood
--
if a person doesn't have a chance he'll agree to an operation using any method if it gives him a certain percentage.
even if it's minimal! Otherwise you die anyway, there's a parallel with novelty, of course,
but calculating targets on a phybe is not new, it's more of a dreary oldie, so the comparison is not really appropriate.
---
>> Andrei, why don't you send me the hard disk?
Yura, I don't believe in the absence of the program, but in its results.
Such statements should be supported either by code or at least by method of checking results or at least by screenshots of statistics.
Yura, I don't believe it's not that there isn't a program, but its results.
Such statements need to be supported either by the code or at least with a method of checking results or at least with screenshots of statistics.
Andrei, I see!
--
>> I wrote it a long time ago!
ran it on the stretch that I had 1999 - 2007
The main task of the program was to check
where often a breakthrough (of night - morning flat) occurs when the richest countries sleep
i.e. to which level after the first breakout... it turned out to be around the 161 level
Of course - not every day is a bump to 161 and a bounce.
i was just gathering statistics
--
and it's not that hard to write such a code
it was an expert - for analytics, had big stops and was not written for working in the market
and to check...
The run was on small timeframes
I'm fine with the option of not having to prove anything at all.
Great, nobody thought to force you to do anything. Just don't use the word "proof" in relation to a supposedly working foeba.
I am more inclined to the view that trading is unlikely to have anything in common with an exact science where everything has a very clear formula and proof...
rather we can talk about probability.
And probability is studied in a science called probability theory, which is clearly laid out, calculated using formulas and proved.
if a man has no chance he will agree to operate with any method if it gives any percentage
even if it's minimal! Otherwise, he'll die anyway. There's a parallel with novelty, of course,
but phoebe target calculation isn't new, it's old-fashioned, so it's not really an appropriate comparison.
So you're dying and grasping at any straw?
It's much more common for people in this situation to fall into the clutches of charlatans than to find a real doctor with a really working methodology. At this stage, phiba is "put a nickel under your heel, spit over your left shoulder three times, walk to the open window in your underwear, and shout loudly - come freebie!
Great, nobody thought to force you to do anything. But then don't use the word "proof" in relation to a supposedly working fiba.
And probability is studied in a science called probability theory, clearly laid out, calculated by formulas and proved.
...So for you, the 3-month stack is where the entries and exits go with the phiba.
is not proof - screenshots are not proof either
and from what you're saying, it's all chance and luck.
Isn't that too much randomness - and luck?
--
here's the state - a week of work on the system inputs - outputs with phiba taken into account
ok let's keep the phrase proof - replace it with confirmation - hopefully this will be loyal
So for you, a 3-month stake is where the entries and exits go with the phiba
is not proof - screenshots are not proof either
and you're saying it's all chance and luck.
Isn't that too much randomness and luck?
We've already agreed that you don't want to bother with proof. Then don't bother with proof either. The money goes and well, don't burden yourself with this theory.
Let's take it from here:
- No, 3 months' worth of stats is not a proof of fiba's performance. Neither for a week.
- Screenshots are not either.
- I didn't say it's all a fluke. Maybe you just have God's gift. It's not proof of fiba's functionality. I showed you three months' worth of screenshots when the monkey made more than the bettor.
- Proof, aka proof, is if you formalise the foeba rule, code it and run it through all the pairs through history. No semi-automatic. The result must be reproducible by other researchers.
..
- Confirmation, aka proof, will be if you formalise the fiba rule, code it and run it through all the pairs through the whole story. No semi-automatic. The result must be reproducible by other researchers.
The week's stack is not mine - it's the stack of a system-trained person...
So it's a result that's replicated by another...
well, okay, statistics -state - well, especially screenshots - in which you have not seen the grain of the system - do not tell you anything ...
Although trading without statistics is like crossing the Moscow ring road for a blind man
...
you understand well that every tool has its own character ...
or do you really think that a system that works on GBPJPY for example - should behave the same on EURGBP?
i remember the monkeys... i like it very much... there is no doubt that one randomize out of 600 can give a random result
you may consider me a lucky "monkey" - no offence :-)
--
i remember the same thing you said about the result
but his viac score went from 2007 to 2009 from 3k to 17 i think... You're saying it's monkey luck too.
well that's a point too...
Yuri, will it hold up?
No, Yuri, timbo is right, your system is not a system and fibo doesn't work.
And I won't believe you unless you actually give me the codes in person.
No, Yuri, timbo is right your system is not a system and Fibo doesn't work
Exactly! Not a system. Fibo levels don't work.
He is afraid to find out why he sometimes manages to make profit. However, psychology comes first in trading. If you sincerely believe in the "system", you may trade on any bullshit. But God forbid that doubts be sown. The result -- nerves, doubts, loss.
That's right! Not the system. Fibo levels don't work.
And that is why he is sometimes able to profit, he is afraid to find out. However, psychology is in the first place in trading. If you sincerely believe in the "system", you may trade on any bullshit. But God forbid that doubts be sown. The result may be nerves, doubts, losses.
>> I totally agree.