Is there a need for a T.A.? - page 35
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
Are you implying that it's easier to win at the lottery than at forex?
//
I know a trader who went from 100 euros to 600 euros in a week at internet roulette
with the system. He has been going at it for a long time. He demonstrated this in front of all the honest people.
But he clearly understood that this could not last long.
Still, I suggest we concentrate more on trading, if you don't mind.
Lottery, roulette... interesting, but there's certainly not enough to do them all, and without trying it,
it's hard to say which is easier.
There was a time when people were afraid of thunderstorms, but now they can predict it even a few days in advance:)
//
That's right. :-)
Of course, there are individuals on this forum and they are not the right people to join together in a creative association. But still, if you go deeper, collective work has a big payoff. There's a lot of unrealized ideas. There's just not enough time for everything. Send me a personal message if anyone is willing to work in a group.
//
Thank you for your reply. I think we could at least chat on Skype.
I'll take my leave for now. I've still got to work on the psychology website
until 1:00 in the morning and then rest. :-)
Unfortunately I am having repairs done at home. I can't talk on Skype yet. The dacha computer is not equipped.
Are you implying that it's easier to win at the lottery than at forex?
I said exactly what I meant. And not at all what you understood my words to mean.
Don't be offended. The lottery has a pre-determined chance of winning, say, every twentieth ticket. That's all?) Formalise it and we win.
No offence. The lottery has a preconceived chance of winning, say, every twentieth ticket. And that's it?) We formalise it, we win.
That's right - a chance. And that chance may always go to anyone but you.
I like clear patterns better than blind chance. The identification of any pattern is formalizable. That's what I wanted to say.
But some figures use the "unformalizability" of their TC only to make money on their seminars, books, workshops and other relatively honest ways of taking money from the public.
The crowd buys, market makers sell.
A couple of questions if I may:
1. How do you determine who is buying and who is selling? Crowd/marketmakers?
2. Why are the candles on the chart without bodies? Do the bodies not matter?
3. what does the bar graph in the lower sub-window indicate? Volumes?
A couple of questions if I may:
1. How do you determine who is buying and who is selling? Crowd/marketmakers?
2. Why are the candles on the chart without bodies? Do the bodies not matter?
3. what does the histogram in the lower sub-window mean? Volumes?
4. How is the channel built, based on what?
goldtrader and sever29
Since I have already highlighted the system and praised it, of course
I will answer your questions first, and then I will ask mine.
1. How do you determine who is buying and who is selling? Crowd/Market Makers?
//
According to the Market Makers theory of market management taught by
the developer of the trading system. This theory does not contradict common sense,
although it does not necessarily reflect the truth. I am quite happy with it
for making profitable trading decisions.
The theory is simple: to sell a good volume profitably, the crowd must buy it,
otherwise this volume will bring down the price before the time it is needed.
It is most convenient to sell when the crowd believes in the continuation
of the uptrend, as in this case and cheerfully buys. The consistent rise
on the bar chart below, is interpreted as an increase in volume as the median bars rise.
If after such a rise we approach some important level, the price
almost always bounces off it by 15-30 pips. It is enough to place a protective stop at
. The same is true for a fall.
A breakout may also happen, but the price would return to the broken level rather quickly
and then it would be safe to buy.
2. Why are the candlesticks without bodies on the chart? Are the bodies irrelevant?
//
These are bars. Open/Close we don't care about. The indicators are not based on them.
The High/Low/Median prices are important.
3. What does the histogram in the lower sub-window mean? Volumes?
//
Correct. It is a kind of synthetic volume indicator. Since everyone knows
about the difficulty of getting volumes on FOREX, I immediately say that it is synthetic
If anyone is confused by the name "Volume", rename the indictor whatever you want
otherwise, and that's it.
4. How is the channel constructed, based on what?
//
Median Muwings.
Now I have a question that has been bothering me for a long time. On the one hand you can understand
that it is important to know how indices are built in order to use them reliably.
But do all good drivers know how an injector, brake system
or engine turbine is built? In my opinion, it's more important to know how
reacts to the fuel gauge in the tank than how it's built.
There is no point in disassembling the construction of the channel. It is important to know that it is a good place
to exit a trade, and therefore it is better not to enter the area of the channel borders
without waiting for a pullback. That's it.
Let's say if the price goes down and reaches the bottom of the channel, then it is dangerous to sell there on a breakout
or something else, until the first pullback. It is very dangerous. That is why it is convenient to fix there
profit either at all, or to re-load at the distance from the channel's border again.
I think these are such commonplace truths that there is no point in explaining them at all,
as many channels are used in such a way.
So why know the methodology of its construction? :-)
Moreover, my losing and profitable weeks have never depended on this factor:
neither 3 years ago, nor now that I know how it is constructed.
The same can be said about all other indicators.
Metaphorically speaking, this system is so simple that if you compare it to
to aeroplanes, it's a pre-war plywood aeroplane. It's a designer who manages to shoot down supersonic fighters
to shoot down supersonic fighters without any difficulty
doing it with enviable accuracy and consistency.
Well, flying this plywood is sometimes quite difficult and if you were to put radar and homing systems on it.
radars, homing systems, autopilot, etc., life would be 10 times easier.
Especially since the frame (fuselage) allows it quite well.