That's interesting - page 22
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
It was not in my plans to lay everything out. I haven't even laid out everything in the system. And it's a long time to write, and why. In addition I wrote briefly about the influencing factors.
. Well, what can I say, my business is to warn against the very likely loss of another four years, your right to ignore the warnings.
Yes, there are many of such virtuoso interpreters of terms ......
. You brought it up yourself without being specific as to what you meant by TA.
And how can one determine the psychology of the crowd, and even in the future, and by the price series, which is no other than martingale? Is nothing confusing to you?
. You seem to have forgotten, I've already written to you about it. "Crowd psychology" is part of the market, not martingale. And the price is indistinguishable from a martingale. And why is that? Because price doesn't reflect all the information about the market.
Stop with your quotes. I have been dealing with TA for many years and I can give you enough of this literary bullshit. You're on your own.
. You haven't been doing TA, you've been chiseling away at martingale mathematics for years - a pointless activity. That's why there are no results. Hence the crisis of the genre and trying to grasp at straws in the form of Schnoll. Sorry!
What you have written about, all these "what is your process" is answered only by FA. But it really is not that simple. Exactly because of its potential workability, I will be crossing my system with, shall we say, some elements of FA in the future
. This is not an FA. It is simply a good understanding of the market and its processes. This is the identification of the model, determining the physical nature of the model and its consistency with reality. The degree of completeness of the model may be different, but everything must be "physical". Behind each parameter there must be a real phenomenon. Then it will be possible to write "PROCESS MODEL" on your posts.
Sorry again!
Mishek, Tantrik, Server30
Where are you going? It's all wrapping up now, so don't be shy - come in, make yourself comfortable. It's all yours now. You can empty yourselves. You've been stomping at the door, you poor souls, you've been patient...
No, I don't want to empty, but I'd like something to eat... Any leftovers? Or did you drink without a snack?
No, I don't want to empty, I just want something to eat... leftovers? Or did you drink without an hors d'oeuvre?
You can't drink without an appetizer or they'll catch devils.
No, I don't want to empty, I just want to eat something... Is there any left? Or were you drinking without a snack?
I take it Farnsworth invited us to the bathroom to join in the process, so to speak.
I understood that Farnsworth was inviting us into the toilet
I take it Farnsworth was inviting us into the toilet, to join in the process, so to speak.
what did he mean by that?
Mishek, Tantrik, Server30
Where are you going? It's all wrapping up now, so don't be shy - come in, make yourself comfortable. It's all yours now. You can empty yourselves. You've been stomping around the door, you poor devils, you've been patient, this is your moment...
what did he mean by that?
I can only guess. He thought the three of us were in desperate need of a... toilet. We can only guess why he thought his "It's interesting" thread was a toilet, but the suggestion
The "you can empty yourselves" was sincere and welcoming to say the least.
What remains a mystery is WHAT "has already been completed" and why he so readily offers this as a gift
. Well, what can I say, my business is to warn against the very likely loss of another four years, your right to ignore the warnings.
It's rare to find a man so thoughtful and sensitive
. You brought it up yourself without being specific as to what you meant by TA.
I did clarify what TA is.
. You seem to have forgotten, I've already written to you about it. "Crowd psychology" is part of the market, not martingale. And yes, the price is indistinguishable from a martingale. And why is that? Because price doesn't reflect all the information about the market.
Thank you very much. You should study your "psychology" yourself, the works of Freud may also help. Well, if they do not help, you may use the spine of the tome to draw channels.
. You have not been studying TA, you have been chiseling away at martingale mathematical methods for many years - a meaningless activity.
What I have been doing, my dear, I know better than you. Believe me.
That's why there are no results. Hence the crisis of the genre and trying to grasp at straws in the form of Schnoll. Excuse me!
What's the matter with you? What fucking straw? Don't you read anything at all? Specially for you, I will copy one of the results: EURUSD, M15, CLOSE, SPRED=10 in old pips (0.0001, I got used to them in my analysis). Testing at 15000 timeframe (150 trading days). The graphs on the image:
In other sections the result is approximately the same, i.e. on the average 800-1500 points within 100-300 trading days. But only drawdowns are alarming. The process I have deduced will not give more points, it is not ideal in this sense, but it is relatively well predictable. All that is needed is a better identification. And I'm sorry - all methods are good here.
And trying to grasp at straws in the form of Schnoll. Excuse me!
??? who's grasping? I don't think you're at all familiar with the maximum likelihood method.
. It's not an FA. It's just a competent understanding of the market and the processes that take place in it. This is the identification of the model, determination of the physical essence of the model and its correspondence to reality. The degree of completeness of the model may be different, but everything must be "physical". Behind each parameter there must be a real phenomenon. Then it will be possible to write "PROCESS MODEL" on your posts.
But I was quite familiar with the theory of modelling. Do you think that such a brilliant idea to build a "PROCESS MODEL" came to your mind and nobody else's? There's an old saying in the market - I'll introduce you to it. If a new and ingenious idea has occurred to you, sit down, take it easy, and think about why it hasn't worked for others.
No one on this site, not you or me, will ever come up with a full-fledged model of the quoting process. Do not waste your time on it. And believe me, you'll thank me later for wasting your time on beer, ladies and other nonsense.
PS: I suggest we wrap up the debate. I'm personally bored and no use. Read all this crap about the psychology of the TA crowd - well, just to be polite to you. And disturb my colleagues, there's Mishek pretending to branch, grumbling :o)))
I can only speculate. He thought the three of us would like to go to the toilet. We can only guess why he thought his "It's interesting" thread was a toilet, but the offer
The "you can empty yourselves" was sincere and welcoming to say the least.
What remains a mystery is WHAT "has already been completed" and why he so readily offers this as a gift.
I did clarify what TA is.
. Didn't notice.
Thank you very much. Study your "psychology" yourself, Freud's works may help. Well, if they don't help, you can use the spine of a folio to draw channels.
. What's Freud got to do with it?! You think we're talking about dumb Hollywood shrinks and their couches?! No. It's about the buy/sell/ wait sentiment of various groups of traders in the market. Are you either pretending or really unaware of this common knowledge fact?
I know better than you what I've been doing, my friend. Believe me.
. All right! Excellent point.
You what? What the fuck is a straw? Don't you read anything at all? Especially for you, I will copy one of the results: EURUSD, M15, CLOSE, SPRED=10 in old pips (0.0001, I got used to them in my analysis). Testing at 15000 timeframe (150 trading days). The graphs on the image:
In other sections the result is approximately the same, i.e. on the average 800-1500 points within 100-300 trading days. But only drawdowns are alarming. The process I have deduced will not give more points, it is not ideal in this sense, but it is relatively well predictable. All that is needed is a better identification. And sorry - all methods are good here.
. Why did you publish that? - I can't stand looking at other people's "tester stats". Especially without a real chart of the price itself. As far as I understand, it's the last six months, that's why I mistook the thin gray line for the EURUSD chart- it looks very similar. I cannot say anything, my deposit grows together with the price and falls along with it - it's not a rare phenomenon, but I do not approve of them. And for you, if you like it - have a nice trip. Well, and "a fixed deposit...at the time of closing of the last transaction" (whatever it means), achieved during 2-3 "transactions" - I don't like it. It's very difficult to navigate your chart, and it's not clear to me how this is better than a primitive "buy and hold" strategy. Seems like it would even give you more. But in any case - good luck.
??? who's grasping? I don't think you're at all familiar with the maximum likelihood method.
. I am. It's not an uber-method, it's just one of the possible ones, with its pros and cons. Why are you bringing it up? I'm talking about principles, you're talking about details...
But I was quite familiar with the theory of modelling. Do you think that such a brilliant idea to build a "PROCESS MODEL" came to your mind and no one else's? There's an old saying in the market - I'll introduce you to it. If a new and ingenious idea has occurred to you, sit down, take it easy, and think about why it hasn't worked for others.
No one on this site, not you or me, will ever come up with a full-fledged model of the quoting process. Do not waste your time on it. And believe me, you can thank me later for wasting your time on beer, dames and other nonsense.
. Who suggested you build a complete model? I didn't, don't give me that nonsense. It was said "The degree of completeness of the model may be different, but everything must be "physical". Behind every parameter there must be a real phenomenon."In what you've laid out and drawn here, there's no "physicality" to be seen. And that's exactly what I've been telling you from the beginning, starting with the question "what is your process?". Sorry for wasting your time.
PS: I suggest we wrap up the debate. I'm personally bored and no use. To read all that crap about the psychology of crowds on TA - well, just to be polite to you. And disturb my colleagues, there's Mishek pretending to have a branch, grumbling :o))
. Really. Let's get on with it.