Price movements can be predicted ! - page 13
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
These are not my conclusions, they are mathematics. Any "independent" conclusions other than these are banal ignorance. Are you trying to show off for the C-levels or are you pushing methods with a claim to be scientific?
If you guess the direction of price movement by flipping a coin, then there is a greater than 5% chance that 6 of 8 predictions will be correct.
In my opinion, 90-95% of people on this forum are C's and F's. I'd classify myself as a loser if you're so eager to give marks.
You know better than that about yourself. Listen to Granit77 and calm down.
to Sart
to Timbo.
Guys, get to the point, please. We're not interested in your fucked-up personalities, we're interested in your predictions. Even people who don't believe in God, hell or Eliot read it..
So please don't spread yourself too thin.
Are you interested in predictions with a flip of a coin?
Sart made a prediction. Suppose the prediction comes true, he makes another one and it comes true again. So what next? The price movement is predictable, Sart is a prophet. Right? The triplets are impressed by this. But what about the case when the forecast came true by accident?
I've already shown on simple examples that the last championship could have been won by a monkey, and with a better result than Batter's. Why don't you adopt this strategy of opening at random. You could make almost two hundred grand in three months.
Sergei, do not pay attention to criticism. It only interferes with your work.
Do your own thing. Those who find it interesting and useful (I am one of them)
follow with pleasure, usefulness and gratitude to you.
With all due respect to timbo, I do not see any constructive message in this case.
With such an approach, you can reject all methods.
Everyone evaluates probabilities in their own way, and this is everyone's personal right.
The dog barks and the caravan follows.
I've already shown with simple examples that last year's championship could have been won by a monkey, and with a better result than Batter's. Why don't you adopt that strategy of opening as you go. You could make almost 200 grand in three months.
I also showed in the ' MathRand() function' thread that the monkeys would have had a better overall trade, and in which thread did you show this?
I'm sorry, but you promised a forecast. if it's not too much trouble to mark it up and explain it. i understand it's hard work. But often when you explain it to others, it becomes clearer to yourself. although i don't believe in eliot waves. but it's just interesting.
Here is a picture of the Japanese:
Highest point - 15.08.08.
Lowest point - 24.10.08
As can be seen from the picture, the development of wave (3) of the oldest analyzed wave of the cycle: (1)(2)(3) is going on at the moment.
The formation of wave 1 of this wave (3) has passed the stage of forming waves 1 and 2, in other words, the stage of the formation of wave 3 of wave 1 of wave (3) is under way.
The development of wave 3 of wave 1 (3) is also at the stage of forming wave 3. The scale of the figure does not allow depicting this wave 3.
As a result, we have the very expected configuration of the market - the coincidence of the development of wave number 3 in successive enclosed cycles.
A condition similar to a compressed spring.
The value of the target is defined as follows. Based on the ratio of the cycle wave lengths according to the Fibonacci proportions,
the minimum objectives of waves 3 for each of the three cycles are calculated. We obtain target 1, target 2, target 3. Then we take the arithmetic mean
and obtain the target given in the forecast.
Yes, of course, statistics are needed to make these predictions convincing. But it's much harder to estimate the probabilities. If Sart had given something simpler, like "this week the Kiwi will close below Monday's open", we could have been flipping a symmetrical coin. But Sart is setting targets and that's a different story.
About Better's EA: maybe one monkey in a thousand would make 200 grand in 3 months (not including drawdown). But you can't ignore that its drawdown should also be comparable to the drawdown of ATS-07 winner.
Even if one accepts the most pessimistic hypothesis for the EA creator that trades were opened three at a time (the sample size of independent trades is three times less, 136 trades - consequently all distributions are blurred with respect to their m.o.), I still doubt that the monkey could trade the same way - assuming of course a reasonable level of significance of the hypothesis is accepted. I have a paper almost finished on estimating the m.o. of a trade sufficient to conclude that it is statistically significant greater than zero - especially for the honors students.
The dog barks, the caravan passes by.
A dog barks, a caravan follows.
As well as amperage and the acceleration of gravity are a personal matter for everyone.
A trinity barker - technological progress is passing by.
Yes, of course, statistics are needed to make these predictions convincing. But it's much harder to estimate the probabilities. If Sart had given something simpler, like "this week the Kiwi will close below Monday's open", we could have been flipping a symmetrical coin. But Sart is indicating targets and it's a different story.
How different? The variant with the movement direction is easier to estimate, that is why I spoke about it only. The goals within one sigma will only make monkey-prognosis easier, because "closing below the opening" is the only possible event, while the achievement of any goal may happen several times during the week.
Would you like a forecast? Please, even two: EURUSD 100 pips up and EURUSD 100 pips down. At the end of the week both of those predictions will come true. Then the price is predictable! Hooray! Or not?
I also showed in the ' MathRand() function' thread that monkeys would have better trading in general, and in which thread did you show this?
Yes, there was a 'monkey trading championship' somewhere. Nothing special: 600 programmer-traders traded exactly like 600 monkeys opening strictly as they please.
In the coming week, I am 100% sure the franc will reach 1.2500, maybe even by Friday we will see the level of 1.3000 !
This is the result of the analysis over the weekend...
Price is now 1.1951
Sart wrote >>
So far the maximum level reached is 1.2300. The rise of 350 points instead of the promised 550.
"Wrong by 2 centimetres."
Although, it's not yet evening yet. The franc is a very fast instrument.
I don't understand why the fast instrument went down?
And why you're the scumbag who barked at the respectable Fourier while you're taking a shit in your own thread?
Timbo is not a good man, but let's face it, he has a brain on his shoulders.
The prognosis did not come true and Sartt is excusing himself like in the military office
- Why did you tear the owl apart, you pig? Did it bother you? Did it bother you, I ask you
? Why did you break Professor Mechnikov?
- He, Filipp Filippovich, needs to be whipped at least once,
Zina said indignantly, - or he'll get completely spoilt. Look,
what he has done with your galoshes.