"Trees don't grow to the sky" - page 46

New comment
 
m_a_sim:

Or maybe it's the hand that's been shaking. :)


No, my pain sensitivity is low... :-)

I'm used to going all the way to the top - either go into space or flush... :-) I have to change my approach...

 
LeoV:


A live example is m_a_sim. How can you invest at 3000%? He thought it would be 6000%?, then he would get his 50% with the money split. But from 3000% to 6000% is as difficult as from a -50% drawdown to 0 - we all know that ))))

It is as easy and difficult to reach 6000% from 3000% as to reach 200% from 100%. If the systems in PAMM are stable, it does not matter what timeframes are being compared and what absolute percentage results these two timeframes have. They are all equivalent.
 
Roman.: Now there are new heroes:-), and English-speaking ones... Just as greedy on the offer, but they fly into space... I'm already on board!!! :-)
Depot loading is a bugger. Drain is inevitable ))))
 
Roman.:


We need to change our approach...


We have to change the managers.
 
C-4:
It is no easier and no harder to reach 6000% from 3000% than from 100% to 200%. If the systems in PAMM are stable, it does not matter which timeframes are compared and what absolute percentage results these two timeframes have. They are all equivalent.

In fact it does. I do not know how to explain it mathematically, but it does)))
 
C-4:
It is no easier and no harder to reach 6000% from 3000% than from 100% to 200%. If the systems in PAMM are stable, it does not matter which timeframes are compared and what absolute percentage results these two timeframes have. They are all equivalent.

I agree. Do you mean 3000% p.a.?
 
C-4:
It is no easier and no harder to reach 6000% from 3000% than from 100% to 200%. If the systems in PAMM are stable, it does not matter which timeframes are compared and what absolute percentage results these two timeframes have. They are all equivalent.
Look at PAMM statistics - the number of those who got from 100 to 200 is much more than those who got from 3000 to 6000. ))) It's more psychology than mathematics. )))
 
m_a_sim:
I agree. Do you mean 3000% p.a.?

Hello ) kindly look at the title of the thread.

LeoV:

In fact it does. I don't know how to explain it mathematically, but it does )))

Imho. Every pattern has its own capacity. The closer to the capacity limit, the harder it is to exploit.

Pipsing in a thin market, for example.

 
Roman.:


Now there are new heroes:-), and English ones... Same greedy on the offer, but they are flying into space... I am already on board!!! :-)


The diagnosis has been made. An MRI of the manager's brain revealed damage incompatible with trading.

 
TheXpert:
Hello ) kindly look at the title of the thread.

okay ) gee whiz )
1...394041424344454647484950515253...87
New comment