entrance point - page 11

New comment
 
let's call an indicator with divergence a blind one.
a blind indicator in the sense of guessing the price movement is nothing more than a lock pick = comb of teeth
if the TS has two blind indicators, the two comb with teeth will be matched to the lock better
and three blind indicators even better
But)))
the optimizer will pick
the best result of the optimizer will turn out to be the most draining
but also the most average will not necessarily work, because the blind indicators are nothing more than picking picks.
 
nkeshka >> :

Finally got to the computer. :) With a parallel link, you'll get a drain. You need to create a serial link. In simpler words. What's the best way to purify water? By running it through 3 filters at the same time or by putting them in series one after the other. In which case better product?

and if you take too many filters, you get the "nappy effect" - something goes in but nothing comes out... :)

 
Mathemat , thank you for getting to the heart of my answer. By correct entry I mean that the entry should bring the planned amount of profit. If an entry does not make the planned amount of profit or has a drawdown or loss, then it is not correct.
 

And if you use too many filters, you get "nappy effect" - something goes in, but nothing comes out ... :)

That's what I said above. If an EA works, it will work very rarely, and the market is changing, and so are the rules.

 
nkeshka >>:
Под правильным входом я понимаю, что вход должен принести запланированное колличество прибыли. Если вход не принес запланированного колличества прибыли или дал просадку или убытки, значит он не правильный.

Genius!!!

 
An idea has already been mentioned above: Signals from different timeframes from different EAs or indicators. In the same analogy with filters, there are three filters: Coarse filter, Medium filter, fine filter. All that is left is to select filters and go forward to the ambercasing of Forex. :о)))
 
nkeshka >> :
An idea has already been mentioned here: Signals from different timeframes from different EAs or indicators. In the same analogy with filters, you can take three filters: Coarse, Medium, Fine. All that is left is to select filters and go forward to the ambercasing of Forex. :о)))

By the time you pick up the filters, the market will have changed. And the loophole will shoot your depot at point-blank range.

 
Korey >> :

Let's call an indicator with divergence a blind indicator.
A blind indicator in the sense of guessing the price movement is nothing more than a picklock = a comb with teeth.
if the TS has two blind indicators, the two comb with teeth will be matched to the lock better
and three blind indicators even better
But)))
the optimizer will pick
the best result of the optimizer will turn out to be the most draining
but also the most average will not necessarily work, because the blind indicators are nothing more than picking picks.

divergence with what ? what does the optimizer have to do with it ? in real trading there is no lock to pick the keys to which you can't make an appropriate comparison but I'll try it through the prism of lock picking ==

the locks in the real world are constantly changing but when we have at hand the keys which in appearance signal to us that they are suitable for the lock then after trying 10 suitable keys there is more chance than 1. so it may be ok.



 
Neutron >>: the reliability of a system is always less than the reliability of its most unreliable component.

OK, counter-example: some critical component of an SS-18 ballistic missile must contain a relay. The reliability of the Soviet relays leaves much to be desired, and let it average 0.2. Is it possible, having only such relays, to achieve the reliability of this unit of 0.99999? Yes, Sergey, you know how to do it (theoretically): you just need to reserve them in such a number N in the circuit itself, so that (1-0.2)^N < 0.00001. We obtain that N >= 52.

So, the reliability of the most unreliable component of the system is 0.2, but the reliability of the node built on these elements equals five "nines".

P.S. Note, I purposely chose 0.2 to show that the reliability of a composite system built on elements with 20/80 reliability still increases with the number of elements.

 

I agree with you here - it all depends on how the system is represented.

If the system is represented as a set of consecutive blocks, any failure of which is fatal to the system, then the reliability of the system is less than the reliability of the weakest link. If, however, the system is represented as a parallel connection of blocks and failure of all blocks is fatal, then the reliability of the system is higher than the reliability of the strongest block.

There is no contradiction. Traditionally, a complex system is reduced to a kind of series chain (if it is possible) and estimate its reliability as product of probabilities for each link.

And here, your P.S. I do not understand. Are you saying that if we flip a coin and guess something with 1/2 probability, then flipping two at once and choosing a match will increase the probability of guessing? I'm sure you mean something else.

1...456789101112
New comment