To follow up - page 12
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
Why is it correct to determine the rate of movement through astronomical time?
it can be useful in defining as price change/time change. It is useful because participants make decisions with a certain periodicity, watch a certain TF and are accordingly guided by the change in price over the corresponding periods. The intrader does not care how the price has changed in a month and does not care how it has changed in an hour, especially if he was in a position at the time. Everyone has their time frame, the frequency of decision making and price change they are used to on their frame and consider normal and what they consider unusual.
I don't deny the time! Especially not "categorically". I'm just against its categorical one-upmanship. And I'm also not a fan (what makes you think that?) of formalisation through the ZZ. Maybe you were led to that thought by a top sabj post and my manic return to it with new versions?))) Well... just a follow-up to something I used to do. I don't know how many other topics I might want to catch up on))).
Sorry, it's just an impression :)
Avals писал(а) >>
Everyone has their own timeframe, the frequency of decision making and price changes they are used to on their frame and consider normal and which one is unusual.
That's what ruins it.
Like the usual scale of prices - when everything is kind of visible on the screen.
then the mouse fiddling may seem like a trade.
;)
That's what ruins it.
Like the usual scale of prices - when everything is kind of visible on the screen.
Then the mouse-over can seem like a trade.
;)
You can only profit from what ruins others :) Otherwise, where else would the speculator get his systematic profits, if not from other people's losses and lost profits due to mass stereotypes? It seems to me that they are the ones who set the "context". Mass in financial terms of course. If even a single market maker acts in the same way in certain situations, it can already be used.
it can be useful in defining as price change/time change. It is useful because participants make decisions with a certain periodicity, watch a certain TF and are accordingly guided by the change in price over the corresponding periods. The intrader does not care how the price has changed in a month and does not care how it has changed in an hour, especially if he was in a position at the time. Everybody has their timeframe, the frequency of decision making and price change that they are used to on their frame and consider as normal and what they consider as unusual.
Disagree. Participants who have a real impact on price are not guided by timeframes.
I disagree.
OK.
So you think that if the price passed a figure in a week or passed it in 1 hour, all other things being equal, it has the same consequences for all participants and for the market as a whole? I think that in the second case different traders will try to enter the trade. Such a move will tempt a lot more momentum and break more stops because many will not have time to make other decisions.
Participants who really influence the price do not focus on timeframes.
...With tick volume it's more complicated, there's an impression that from time to time DTs just change the filtering parameters of the primary quotes flow...
In addition to the equi-dimensional ones, there are also ranges that are devoid of this disadvantage.
But also devoid of information about this variable
That seems to me to be the problem. Framing (or barring? :) ) by context, we really leave one part of the initial information and discard the other. It is this choice that decides everything. Only ignorance of what is important and what is not creates an illusion of freedom in the approach to framing.
This context is a slippery one, as soon as it seems that I have penetrated into it, and then a new explanation ruins everything :). I guess it's time to ask a stupid question :) .
I am a fan of a certain trading system, MACD Sample with MATrendPeriod=26 for certainty. I ran it on history and detected the periods when it works and when it doesn't. Did I frame it in context or not?
Right, that's all you've got to go on. Well, it is as if you are looking at a "naked", without indicators, familiar price chart.
Clearly, this (your TS) way of framing might not be entirely convenient for further manipulation with it, but in principle, yes, it's within the concept.
===
I just want to be clear. I don't pretend or - God forbid - want to prove anything to anyone. I'm just trying to tell you about my vision of the market, which I have come to; about what I have decided is important for the effect. TC, and how I envisage market processes. The essence is in my understanding. So any opinions "not on me" are welcome. I'm not a freaking schmuck, complexed out by my own exceptionalism. But, of course, I want to be understood correctly and the questions (even "dumb" ones - I didn't say that!)) are useful to me, and even more so to me. Little did I miss...
But also devoid of information about this variable
Well, the opening time of the bar is at least available.