"The 'perfect' trading system - page 45
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
But this is more from the fact that the essence is presented the way it is presented. No clear formulation, no intelligible empirical basis. (That's in your court, Victor!))
The wording is strict enough. Enough to allow for different implementation options.
Everyone's knowledge set is different, so not everyone immediately understands the meaning of my comments.
The wording is strict enough. Enough to allow for different implementation options.
Everyone's knowledge set is different, so the meaning of my comments is not immediately clear to everyone.
It's all stated vaguely. For example, this idea, about synchronisation, I understood it as the first or second (I don't remember anymore) rule of the Phantom of the Exchange.
imho the author has not proved the stability of his system and claims like "at least a year". The author's system has only been draining since February of this year. And the stability of equity is even less, just a few months. So there is nothing to discuss here.
Well why not, he hasn't. He repeated this thesis several times loudly and clearly. It can be considered proven.
Victor, have you tried a regular moving average? Periods 9, 18 on the Eurobucks should give good results. Of course, the market is volatile, everything can change tomorrow, but still. The usual technique in the market, can sometimes give great profits compared to some complicated statistical tricks.
- "I hear you have some suppositories, can I have some, please?
- What do you want, for hemorrhoids or birth control?
- I'll have a white one, and a long one..."
The wording is strict enough. Enough to allow for different implementation options.
Everybody has different knowledge set, that's why not everyone understands the meaning of my comments at once.
Is it "circular defence" again? ))) No, Victor, the reality is that it's not people who are so stupid, but the one who explains is inarticulate.
Just don't appeal to the GTR if you want to debate the subject of comprehensibility, OK? For all the similarity in the title, your case does not require an equally high IQ.))
Is it "all-round defence" again? ))) No, Victor - the reality is that it's not people who are so stupid, but the one who explains is inarticulate.
Only don't appeal to GTR, if you want to discuss the topic of accessibility for understanding, OK? For all the similarity in the title, your case doesn't require an equally high IQ.)))
As they say, call it what you like, but don't throw it into a thorn bush :)
What do I care how my explanations look like, intelligible or not?
The explanations have no effect on the adaptive EA.
On the other hand, if someone wants to get to the bottom of it, they won't mind if I speak Chinese here.
The question is not about stupidity or IQ, but whether someone needs to understand it or not:
1. Whoever needs to understand, understands.
2. The rest have to take a pose and say with pity: "We're not dumb, you're just incomprehensible" :)
In the second case, sorry - you can't please everyone, but I don't need to.
As they say, call it what you like but do not throw it into a bush :)
What do I care if my explanations look clear or not?
My explanations have no effect on the adaptive EA's performance.
On the other hand, if someone wants to get to the bottom of it, it won't stop them even if I speak Chinese here.
The question is not about stupidity or IQ, but whether someone needs to understand it or not:
1. Whoever needs to understand, understands.
2. The rest have to take a pose and say with pity: "We're not dumb, you're just incomprehensible" :)
In the second case, excuse me, you won't please everybody, but I don't need it.
Come on. You're in a public place. And on your own initiative. So don't tell tales about how you don't care.
If you want to keep telling yourself fairy tales about yourself - "I always do everything right" - why do it in public?
Doesn't work for many reasons.
Come on. You're in a public place. And on your own initiative. So don't tell me fairy tales about not caring.
If you want to keep telling yourself fairy tales about yourself - "I always do everything right" - why do it in public?
Doesn't work for a lot of reasons.
The answer is kind of obvious. To find those who need to deal with OTT.
For example, when selling software to vendors, usually 1 out of 500 potential customers reaches an actual purchase.
The numbers are tentative, but the order of the industry average is reflective.
In other words, 499 contacts, no matter what you tell them, they still won't buy for various reasons.
For example, the Adaptive Expert Advisor has become one of the 60 most popular Expert Advisors for 2 months: "Downloaded: 3840".
So, as you can see, I really don't "care" - in this case, the probability theory is perfectly applicable :)