Anti-Martingale vs Martingale : Good prevails!!! - page 21
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
No, no, Mishek is exaggerating. The opinion is that if the Z-account is not zero, you can increase profitability by manipulating lots.
What do you mean he's lying, that was a quote from Denis
What do you mean lying, that was a quote from Denis.
No, no, Mishek is exaggerating. The opinion is that if the Z-account is not statistically zero, you can increase profitability by manipulating lots.
didn't find that in the author's opinion. It was about sl, tp, profit/loss ratios. It doesn't determine the relationship between trades.
Slava, there's this... collective insanity. I almost got killed here.
We? I've got all the moves written down. You're the one trying to drown someone, set their hair on fire with a hammer, trim their genitals to an unacceptable state. You're a psychopath. )
It's like a serial suicide.
I didn't find this in the author. It was about sl, tp, profitable/lossfree ratios. It doesn't determine the relationship between trades.
right here:
Only on the previous one, no. I always proceed from at least a series. Either a series of wins or a series of losses, or both.
imha - there are 2 logical reasons to change the saiz based on the results of previous trades
1. The new signal is "stronger" than the previous one
2. Selection of favourable phases for the system
But 1 is not really analyzing the results of deals, but the technical factors. Although there may be cases of increasing lot size during a slow move.
And 2 requires too many statistics - an order of magnitude more than for the system itself. Otherwise the fit is more likely.
imha - there are 2 logical reasons to change the saiz based on the results of previous trades
1. The new signal is "stronger" than the previous one
2. Selection of favourable phases for the system
But 1 is not really analyzing the results of deals, but the technical factors. Although there may be cases of increasing lot size during a slow move.
And 2 requires too many statistics - an order of magnitude more than for the system itself. Otherwise the fit is more likely.
I agree completely. With one clarification. We have a criterion to clarify the highlighted - that very tail-end consequence.
I would beg to differ. Is there a fit in the planting material selection system too?