First sacred cow: "If the trend started, it will continue" - page 11
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
In order to know which way the trend will start after a flat wandering, you need to know which saturation zone it was in...the sell zone or the buy zone...
Are oversold and overbought synonymous with the saturation zone?
Well, here we are. We have to forget that price is random, if it is random, then it's a dead end.
When a trend develops, the behaviour of the crowd is not random. I really like the concept of self-affirming and self-destructing charts. I wrote earlier on this forum in another thread.
As soon as the most advanced part of the crowd suspects the beginning of a trend, it enters the market from the cache. The demand exceeds the supply and the demand begins to equalize with the supply at the expense of the price. Less advanced part of the crowd sees the beginning of the trend and also starts to enter the market. The trend starts to confirm itself. It starts to develop just because it is marked on the chart! This is the main information upon which the most unadvanced part of the crowd makes a decision. That is why it is written that the trend is more likely to continue than to end. How long will the trend continue? The answer is until the instrument is overbought (oversold). Please note that besides the notions of "pattern" and "fractal" (according to chaos) I also introduce the notion of "oversold/oversold" into the trend concept. In fact, the trend is not a function of one "variable" - a pattern, but of a large number, and not of three.
Again on the subject of randomness. There is mass service theory, one of many theories built on the concept of random variable. It calculates perfectly the length of the queue and the waiting time of people in the queue, for example, in the underground. There are people in the underground and there are people in Forex. In the underground people generate a normal law, but not on Forex, because in the underground all the comers act independently of each other, according to their own plan, while in Forex they don't. The whole crowd, always divided into parts: up, down or seen from the outside.
Anything concrete to show, apart from arguments about advanced, unadvanced? What is overbought can you explain in non-magic terms? What is "marked on the chart" in the storoge definition? How is your notion of a trend different from the rest of the trending water? There are legion of such theories, and when you ask for specifics, they immediately go into magic terminology.
Well, here we are. We have to forget that price is random, if it is random, then it's a dead end.
When a trend develops, the behaviour of the crowd is not random. I really like the concept of self-affirming and self-destructing charts. I wrote earlier on this forum in another thread.
As soon as the most advanced part of the crowd suspects the beginning of a trend, it enters the market from the cache. The demand exceeds the supply and the demand begins to equalize with the supply at the expense of the price. Less advanced part of the crowd sees the beginning of the trend and also begins to enter the market. The trend starts to confirm itself. It starts to develop just because it is marked on the chart! This is the main information upon which the most unadvanced part of the crowd makes a decision. That is why it is written that the trend is more likely to continue than to end. How long will the trend continue? The answer is until the instrument is overbought (oversold). Please note that besides the notions of "pattern" and "fractal" (according to chaos) I also introduce the notion of "oversold/oversold" into the trend concept. In fact, the trend is not a function of one "variable" - a pattern, but of a large number, and not of three.
Again on the subject of randomness. There is mass service theory, one of many theories built on the concept of random variable. It calculates perfectly the length of the queue and the waiting time in a queue of people, for example, in the underground. There are people in the underground and there are people in Forex. In the underground people generate a normal law, but not on Forex, because in the underground all the comers act independently of each other, according to their own plan, while in Forex they don't. The whole crowd, always divided into parts: up, down or watch from the outside.
On liquid instruments about the charts it is 50 percent like that.
Anything concrete to show other than speculation about advanced, unadvanced? What is overbought can you explain in non-magical terms? What is "marked on the chart" in a storied definition? How is your notion of a trend different from the rest of the trending water? Such theories are legion, and when you ask for specifics, they immediately go into magic terminology.
What is specifics? The sum of angles of a triangle = 180? Or anything else like that, and if concreteness in that sense does not and cannot exist? maybe there is a concreteness of indeterminacy? I wrote earlier that "a trend is a set of rules that confirm a market reversal". These sets are a countable but infinite number (good if countable). I'm adding oil to your scrap. A set of trend confirming rules is created, necessarily dies, then is reborn, then maybe dies forever, maybe not forever. And this process is not accidental. Indicators are rule sets, at their creation they allowed to predict something in the market and periodically it happens and sometimes it does not. These fluctuations come from the ratio of parts of the crowd that believe and do not believe in these rules of a given indicator. This is from the concept of self confirming and self destroying charts. Fibo - it works, it doesn't work, and if it doesn't work now, that doesn't mean it won't work in a day or a week.
I suggested using the word "pattern", which is what recognises a trend. The first question to the pattern (actually the most important part of the TS), what parts should it have? This thread suggested a candlestick combination, then suggested using another pair to predict this one, but those are all indicators. Is it possible to build a pattern using only trend indicators? Maybe, apart from trend indicators, the pattern should include volatility indicators? Or is it not enough? I would like to work out a concrete set of rules for the pattern elements - it would be a valuable specifics.
Anyway, I find it almost useless to explain that there is no profit in trends, zigzags, forecasts, waves, pivot points, levels and almost everything else. Look at Matemat on grasn. On the one hand he seems to know and understand everything. And he says exactly: the reason is greed and there are no trends. On the other hand he has a rationalisation that allows him to "You can only profit from a good prediction" and "Look at my model - in fact I only predict the average." I don't want to lead your thread away, so I won't ask him anything else. What interests me is fixed - he is trying to predict the market and let's say that trends in the conventional sense have nothing to do with it, but only true averages indicating the direction of trading, still no profit there, no matter what you call it. Such examples, when a person in the abstract and as applied to others is aware of greed, but as applied to himself - closes his eyes, are the fundamental basis of another reality - in general everyone is losing in the market.
"
I gave a definition of a trend, clear enough, showed the general approaches I use, even gave a strict mathematical criterion, said where to find it. And what are you talking about? You'd better give your own definition of the trend instead of this psychoanalysis, which is not fucking necessary: "...he seems to know and understand everything" on the one hand, and on the other hand ".. . he has a rationalization". Which side of your text should you read from? Should I start with the rationalisation or should I start with the fact that I know everything? Also, I don't really understand the opposition, it seems to be a logical consequence of "I know and am aware" and hence "rationalising". :о)))
Greed is the strongest, almost uncontrollable motivator. Greed is not a bad habit from which one can get rid, it is not an annoying fly from which one can swat away, and it is not even a vice that can be cured. It is not in vain that it has been classified as a mortal sin - its consequences are inevitable and cruel, bringing sorrow and suffering to its bearer and to those close to him. As a motivator, greed uses all human knowledge to put it at its service, hence the army of those who dump on the market where they know for sure there is no profit. Hence such moments when a person says that others are greedy and do not understand that there are no trends, while I predict the future by the power of my mind. It is almost impossible to admit to oneself that it is greed that has subordinated all the power of one's mind to profit where there is none. That requires a will. If people had the will, there would be paradise, but all we have now is leakers.
I think you're getting hung up on leaking. I hope there's nothing wrong with you? Or is this a "but suffer" kind of post. I hope I didn't misspell that word too harshly?
when a man says that others are greedy
and i'm greedy!!! You think I don't see trends????!!! I can see them every step of the way!!!!! There! Look at that! You saw it! There's a big, fat fucking trend going on. And look at the eurik, it's crawling with them.
Generally everyone is leaking in the market.
Correct!!!! Absolutely correct!!! I'm sure there is no idiot who would claim to make money all the time. Or is there such an idiot? :o)
PS: For that is the nature of the market. Only those who do not sell out at the right time. And that is the whole art - to leave at the right time.
to forte928
What to know which way the trend will start after the flat wandering, you should know in which saturation zone it was...in the sell zone or buy zone...
What kind of zones are these? Where did you get them?
I gave a definition of a trend, clear enough, showed the general approaches I use, even gave a strict mathematical criterion, said where to find it. And what are you talking about? You'd better give your definition of trend instead of psychoanalysis, which is not needed: "...he seems to know and understand everything" on the one hand, and on the other hand ".. . he has a rationalization". Which side of your text should you read from? Should I start with the rationalisation or should I start with the fact that I know everything? Also, I don't really understand the opposition, it seems to be a logical consequence of "I know and am aware" and hence "rationalising". :о)))
I think you're getting kind of hung up on the drain. I hope there's nothing wrong with you? Or is this post from the category of "and suffer". I hope I didn't make too gross a misspelling in that word?
and i am greedy!!! You think I don't see trends????!!! I can see them every step of the way!!!!! There! Look at that! You saw it! There's a big, fat fucking trend. And look at the eurik, it's crawling with them.
Right!!!! Absolutely right!!! I'm sure there's no idiot who would claim to earn it all the time. Or is there such an idiot? :o)
PS: For that is the nature of the market. Only those who do not sell out at the right time. And that is the whole art - to leave at the right time.
to forte928
What kind of zones are these? Where did you get them?
OK. As there will be a profit from your strict matcriteria, so share the joy with everyone. Personally, that will be enough for me, as your definition, approaches and strict matcriteria are of no interest to me. I don't give a definition of a trend, as I know that trends in terms of profit don't exist, and all other definitions are self-defeating or dumb for my personal taste.
There's nothing wrong with me, sort of. Unfortunately though, I don't have the rationalisation that my greed can push through to make me believe in lottery success, the reality of 'getting away in time', profits in trends etc. My level of greed does not allow me to jump up crying "Eureka! Give me a trend and I'll make a profit!" I'm still a trivial contemplator.
Forgive the lecture on greed and the fact that you came to my rescue. Please accept that apart from people with genius ideas about trends, there are also people who have a banal idea about greed and about lack of profit in trends, an idea that finds confirmation in everything and everyone, as opposed to belief in a trend.
What is concreteness? The sum of the angles of a triangle = 180? Or anything else like that, and if concreteness in that sense doesn't and can't exist? maybe there is concreteness of uncertainty? I wrote earlier that "a trend is a set of rules that confirm a market reversal". These sets are a countable but infinite number (good if countable). I'm adding oil to your scrap. A set of trend confirming rules is created, necessarily dies, then is reborn, then maybe dies forever, maybe not forever. And this process is not accidental. Indicators are rule sets, at their creation they allowed to predict something in the market and periodically it happens and sometimes it does not. These fluctuations come from the ratio of parts of the crowd that believe and do not believe in these rules of a given indicator. This is from the concept of self confirming and self destroying charts. Fibo - it works, it doesn't work, and if it doesn't work now, that doesn't mean it won't work in a day or a week.
I suggested using the word "pattern", which is what recognises a trend. The first question to the pattern (actually the most important part of the TS), what parts should it have? This thread suggested a candlestick combination, then suggested using another pair to predict this one, but those are all indicators. Is it possible to build a pattern using only trend indicators? Maybe, apart from trend indicators, the pattern should include volatility indicators? Or is it not enough? I would like to work out a concrete set of rules about the pattern elements - it would be a valuable specifics.
If there were witches, they would wear dresses and fly on brooms. The brooms, then they have them, then they don't. The first question for a witch's dress is what parts should it have? I suggest dresses with necklines, no collars, because it's sexier that way. Good lord, such blah-blah-blah is written on every fence about how to market properly.
As expected, you are unable to cite a strict definition of a trend that does not magically die forever. Alchemy, astrology, all sorts of near-scientific bullshit, including trends in terms of profits exist with rules that cannot be falsified. All the time something new is being added and something old is being eliminated for the sake of the momentary conjuncture. The basis of all delusions is the lack of clear and unambiguous definitions, the lack of repeatability of the result, the lack of direct evidence.
You have not given rules, according to which, step by step, anyone present here could deduce the trend as you understand it. That's what would be the specifics that could either be confirmed in terms of profit or refuted. I daresay that you have no rules with which to delineate trends in terms of profit. Any other trendology is of no interest.
Well, here we are. We have to forget that price is random, if it is random, then it's a dead end.
When a trend develops, the behaviour of the crowd is not random. I really like the concept of self-affirming and self-destructing charts. I wrote earlier on this forum in another thread.
As soon as the most advanced part of the crowd suspects the beginning of a trend, it enters the market from the cache. The demand exceeds the supply and the demand begins to equalize with the supply at the expense of the price. Less advanced part of the crowd sees the beginning of the trend and also begins to enter the market. The trend starts to confirm itself. It starts to develop just because it is marked on the chart! This is the main information upon which the most unadvanced part of the crowd makes a decision. That is why it is written that the trend is more likely to continue than to end. How long will the trend continue? The answer is until the instrument is overbought (oversold). Please note that besides the notions of "pattern" and "fractal" (according to chaos) I also introduce the notion of "oversold/oversold" into the trend concept. In fact, the trend is not a function of one "variable" - a pattern, but of a large number, and not of three.
Again on the subject of randomness. There is mass service theory, one of many theories built on the concept of random variable. It calculates perfectly the length of the queue and the waiting time in a queue of people, for example, in the underground. There are people in the underground and there are people in Forex. In the underground people generate a normal law, but not on Forex, because in the underground all the comers act independently of each other, according to their own plan, while in Forex they don't. The whole crowd, always divided into parts: up, down or look from the outside.
When the trend is outlined on the chart, it's time to get out of the market.
Overbought - oversold is a complete abstraction.
All the so-called trends, no matter on what term, are better to be seen only on history.
The price does not know where it will be in a minute, moreover in a year.
There may be some price dependence on certain levels.
Ok. As there will be profit from your strict matcriteria, so share the joy with everyone. Personally, it will be enough for me, as your definition, approaches and strict matcriteria are not interesting to me. I don't give a definition of a trend, as I know that trends in terms of profit don't exist, and all other definitions are self-defeating or dumb for my personal taste.
There's nothing wrong with me, sort of. Unfortunately though, I don't have the rationalisation that my greed can push through to make me believe in lottery success, the reality of 'getting away in time', profits in trends etc. My level of greed does not allow me to jump up crying "Eureka! Give me a trend and I'll make a profit!" I'm a banal contemplative so far.
Forgive the notation about greed and the fact that you came up to me. Please accept that apart from people with genius ideas about trends, there are also people who have a trivial idea about greed and about lack of profit in trends, an idea which finds confirmation in everything and everyone, unlike belief in a trend.
nda... if you read carefully - I also argue that there are no trends in the "classical" sense. You and I are kindred spirits. Although it is rather curious, it turns out that there is no such thing, which is not even defined, although the term is used. Anyway, you seem to know better :o)
Personally, this will be enough for me, as your definition, approaches and strict matcriteria are not interesting for me
Usually, if you are not interested, you don't write it. And don't mess with people's heads.
You haven't given any rules according to which step by step anyone here could deduce the trend as you understand it. That would be the specifics that could either be confirmed in terms of profit or refuted. I daresay you have no rules by which to delineate trends in terms of profit. Any other trendology is of no interest.
Apart from the rails of Moscow-Peter there are mountains, valleys and seas then in the doldrums then in the storm. In ordinary life people do not live on rails. If we talk about science, it distinguishes between systems that are deterministic, which you recognise, stochastic, dynamic and indeterminate. Forex is both stochastic on short time frames, dynamic and always uncertain and never deterministic. There is such a science of "Management under Uncertainty". If you read books regularly, the area of "trendology" will shrink and the area of science, with repeatable experiences, will expand. No one will teach you a specific algorithm that will make you the lord of the rings. And it's not out of greed - there is no such algorithm. The proof is simply primitive. In forex, you win from losers. No one creates added value like in manufacturing. Suppose you have the grail and win more and more. One day it will turn out that you have won all your money and the market that you have been winning in simply does not exist and your grail is dead. It is this circumstance that underlies the volatility of the market. I too would like life to be like a rail.