Ring - page 10
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
Что вижу, то пою.
Any thoughts on the substance? Or is it "what I see is what I troll"?
Who would doubt it! )))
And now imagine that instead of 30 pairs you take 30 coins, which from the point of view of ring supposition is one-maybe, and you consider a series of tossings. You see where I'm going with this? ))) And since a flip of 30 coins is, in essence, exactly the same as flipping one coin 30 times, then... Shall I go on? )))
OK. There is an assertion (assumption) by the author that a system consisting of random (50/50) processes always tends towards some sort of balance - the same 50/50.
Who would doubt it! )))
And now imagine that instead of 30 pairs you take 30 coins, which from the point of view of ring supposition is one-maybe, and you consider a series of tossings. You see where I'm going with this? ))) And since a flip of 30 coins is, in essence, exactly the same as a flip of one coin 30 times, then... Shall I go on? )))
the difference is that if coin #12 went heads, that means coin #21 MUST have gone tails - feel the difference?
продолжатьThis would then be tantamount to running the TS with a random entry on a single pair.
And that all works out if you follow your own premise (50/50). But it isn't so, is it? Then maybe the premise is wrong? Or maybe they are? )))
OK. There is an assertion (assumption) by the author that a system consisting of random (50/50) processes always tends towards some sort of balance - the same 50/50.
Who would doubt it! )))
And now imagine that instead of 30 pairs you take 30 coins, which from the point of view of ring supposition is one-maybe, and you consider a series of tossings. You see where I'm going with this? ))) And since a flip of 30 coins is, in essence, exactly the same as a flip of one coin 30 times, then... Shall I go on? )))
You'd better tell me, how are these coins related to each other? But the pairs are connected.
This would then be tantamount to running the TS with a random entry on a single pair.
And that all works out if you follow your own premise (50/50). But it isn't so, is it? Then maybe the premise is wrong? Or maybe they are? )))
You managed to reply while I was ruling my sabb...You'd better tell me, how are these coins connected to each other? The pairs are connected.
Exactly!
продолжать, продолжать...
разница в том, что если монетка №12 упала орлом, то это значит, что монетка №21 ОБЯЗАТЕЛЬНО упала решкой - чуете разницу?
If you're talking about coins, the odds are still 50/50 that coin number 21 will go tails.
If you are referring to forex, I wrote above about the prerequisites.
Erm. well risk diversification is in sight. it is not clear which principles should be used to open orders. i.e. which indices or is it just the order that should be followed?
just a single-step opening of these positions