SOME ANALYSIS FIGURES FACTS COMMENTS 2008 - page 3
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
1:600-700 is in the championship
and also + from a kennel in which you probably have about 500-600 too, then the chance is too far away
No pluses. If one out of 600 monkeys does knowingly more than humans, then the odds of that particular monkey winning are 1 in 600. Given that all monkeys are exactly the same, using one of them for a championship gives the same 1:600 chance of winning.
О! What's the goal of the championship? To make 40K easy?
The Monkey Championship was held in response to regular references to the results of previous championships as a strong argument for the possibility of profitable auto-trading. Trivial testing shows that this is not the case. The Championship results do NOT prove the possibility of profitable auto-trading. With the existing approach the Championship cannot prove it in principle.
So what is the true purpose of a championship? I have already voiced my version, the purpose is to show the dealing centres how much money can be made on the server equipment from MQ. So, it follows that no one will race monkeys, and it means that there is nothing for humans to do here.
Judging from the start of the new championship, someone has let at least half of the monkeys out of the cage. Here's one of them, a fresh one - 'SimpleTrade - high profit!
Everyone's goals are different.
the authors also have different objectives - someone may make a profit or check his TS - you never know
the organizers also have their own goals written about them openly - well, maybe there are more unannounced
it is possible that your version is real
---
with regard to possible or impossible to create a profitable TS - I think it is impossible to create one for all time, for a specific period is realistic
let's take the bettor's TS as an analogue - it's stopped now - and rightly so as it's a buy
but she got 170% p.a. - and that's on the machine and not with his hands
so if you put your brain to it, it's kind of possible.
---
A very tempting prospect. Given that monkeys are guaranteed to beat humans, taking one from a kennel, my chances of winning 40K are one in six hundred - seems quite good. On the other hand, that means that the expected return on time invested in registration etc. is 67 bucks... Maybe I'll find more profitable options for investment after all.
timbo - where did this figure come from?
i have already invested 67$ but i still have a chance to get 40.000-00 (even 1:600). is it a bad investment ?
is it a pay per advisor ?
timbo - where did that figure come from?
I invested 67$ and still have an opportunity (even if it is 1:600) to get 40,000-00 is it not a good investment ?
is it payment for an adviser or something ?
On the contrary, it is expected return on my time and labor investment in registering the monkey in the Championship and passing metacurrent checks - possible income multiplied by the probability of getting 40000*1/600=$66,667
On the contrary, it is the expected return on my time and labour investment in registering the monkey for the championship and passing the metacquota checks - a possible return multiplied by the probability of getting it 40000*1/600=$66,667
Got it! Got it!
It's not the amount you paid. It's a virtual amount.
So there is no cost.
--
although I lied when I said there was no cost.
--
In fact, you could add to that the time
for setting up the monkey.
sitting at the computer all the time - reading conferences, downloading, internet traffic.
time spent reading messages and responding to some
testing runs and all sorts of things that go with it
etc.
very few people take time into account! and by the way, time=monetary
---
if it does not come in the form of sales of their programs -advisors
or if it does not come in the form of returns from trading via auto-trading
then maybe it's all for nothing and there's no point.
of course alexei i am slowly leading the dialogue against the monkey method... after all a "monkey" is not going to look at mn1 w1 d1 and think... its element is "random"
My element is also random. So I get to the menagerie automatically.
I still don't understand what kind of grail the "monkeys" have? Maybe they can chop cabbage with it? Then let's adopt tactics and chop cabbage.
Let's cooperate, "monkeys" 10-20 in the cooperative "ZOOPARK". (At once we are lagant, we can't be matched). Each of us before the tournament to distribute the system. 19 "monkeys" merge, one "monkey" closes with 100K-200K, and the real 40K go to the cooperative "ZOOPARK" - 2K-4K on the "snout. :)
There should be at least two rounds in the championship, then no one will have to be called a "monkey".
My element is also random. It means I get to the menagerie automatically.
I still don't understand what kind of grail the "monkeys" have? Maybe they can chop cabbage with it? Then let's adopt tactics and chop cabbage.
Let's cooperate, "monkeys" 10-20 in the cooperative "ZOOPARK". (At once we are lagant, we can't be satisfied). Each of us before the tournament to distribute the system. 19 "monkeys" merge, one "monkey" closes with 100K-200K, and the real 40K go to the cooperative "ZOOPARK" - 2K-4K on the "snout. :)
timbo
coaster
:-)
actually
1 monkey technique
2 hand job
3 using a smart Expert Advisor
there are many traders' contests that are easy to check
you do not have to pay for participation
try all three options - get statistics
---
timbo
coaster
:-)
actually
1 monkey technique
2 hand job
3 using a smart Expert Advisor
there are many traders' contests that are easy to check
you do not have to pay for participation
try all three options - get statistics
---
I am amused by locksmiths.
-Oh-ooh-ooh-ooh. No fair. It's a pipsqueak!!!!! (or)
-What lots!!!! Not fair. (or).....................
Happy winners, that's the first thing.
And secondly, everyone seems to have completely forgotten about the esteemed jury.
So, everything will be all right. The strongest will win. And the man will win.
coaster, I'd be happy to rejoice in the winners. I've never been a locksmith, I have no use for it (although both claims, emotionally loaded aside, could have been mine). Our task now is not to shout "Atu him, abizian!", but to sort out whether the abizian could have done the same thing as the winner, close to him or claiming victory. About Better and winwin2007 we already figured that out: it is highly probable that the abyssians could not have done the same thing again. Another thing is that what the latter did is banned in most DCs.
And fuck it, let the abyssian win (actually not the abyssian, but a person whose actions could very well be repeated by the abyssian). Your words, if you will excuse me, look more like populism, rather than an attempt to find out the truth. Well, like "the main thing is not to win, but to take part".
P.S. Try to estimate how many people from the first ten in both past Ch (in total - twenty people) could repeat the results of Abyzian. And the reason may not even be the "thoughtlessness" of the strategy, but simply the lack of statistics, which does not allow to state statistically reliably that only humans could have done this.
Mathemat, I fortunately (or unfortunately) don't have an important author's memory. :)
If you also had time to take part in such statements, then there are already enough of them, as on your authorship my memory has already concentrated its attention.
(IMHO): will not win "monkeys", otherwise the same words you can throw all the official observers, and our jury knows everything (IMHO) no worse than our forum users (for myself I'm even silent - I'm an inexperienced novice still very much). And I'm not annoyed by those comments. I'm telling you: such comments amuse me.
And as for the "lockeys", they are all the same in nature does not happen. :)
And who should really be unpleasant - it's those who are sitting around the clock at the computer trying to make a winner, and who are starting to throw rotten tomatoes, as soon as he begins to pull ahead. So it's more a question of ethics than populism.