Thoughts on the random - page 4
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
So, I will continue with my thought.
We don't have to hit a series of perfect signals (on past data) at 100% to trade in the black. At least 55% accuracy is enough, say. That is, we should generate a series of zeros that differs from the ideal series by 45% at most. If you try to generate a very large number of rows at random, it turns out that they coincide with the ideal row by about 50%.
I want to calculate how many rowsexist that differ from the ideal row by at most 45%. I assume it will be mere pennies compared to the original number of possible rows (2 ^ 60,000). But it is also intuitively clear that there will still be a huge number of such rows. If we get them, we can try to do something further in order to look for regularities.
The problem is that the market is not a self-perpetuating system like RSLOS. The market is fed by external influences in the form of news, the direction of which is difficult to predict unless you are an astrologer, theologian or Terence McKenna with his Novelty Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novelty_theory#Novelty_theory).
The argument is clear. I'm not an astrologer or a hardened lunatic. But, the hypothesis of a pattern in the original series is not discarded.
It seems to me that the binary series, especially over many years, is a very limited price series model, lacking all its characteristic features, so no matter how you spin it, nothing useful can be squeezed out.
In the coming days I will think about and write down the number of potential states of some given quotes taking into account High, Low, Open, Close prices accurate to 4 decimal places. The task is theoretically interesting.
The forex market is absolute and utterly random... If you imagine: what affects a single change in the EUR/USD pair?????? Thousands of transactions by banks and the same number of army of traders.... And in turn these all transactions are completely random.... All these operations are the generator of random numbers..... Therefore, no matter how any arithmetic operations on random numbers are performed, we get random numbers at the output of the algorithm. And trends and flies are the name of a certain section of a random sequence, which either rise, fall or stand still.... Want to make money on These Random Sequence Plots?????????? Go!!!!!! BUT remember - any operations on random numbers will lead to random numbers!!!!!!
If there are areas in a series with characteristic features that distinguish the series from perfect randomness, then it is no longer absolute and perfect randomness. So your conclusion that forex is absolute and perfect randomness is not correct.
... You should work not with quotes statistics, but with statistics of TRADEMARKED deals (opened on signals of some TS),... and look not for direction, but for VOLUME of a new position... (no thanks ;-).
Haven't gotten to that yet.
(Thanks, though.)
... You should work not with quotes statistics, but with statistics of TRADEMARKED deals (opened on the signals of some TS),... and look not for direction, but for the VOLUME of a new position... (no thanks ;-)
Statistics of transaction outcomes on historical data, on forward or on real trading?
In short, it's all nonsense. If you're not interested, you can just walk away.
Alexei, everyone has known you here for a long time. Speak up!
You have a chance to avoid a pile of twigs.)
The time is different now!
Are the outcome statistics on historical data, forward or real trading?
Whichever way one likes.
Everyone here is an adult. Everyone is well aware that the nature of the statistics is simply bound to change over time. And it is most logical to use as many independent processes running in parallel as possible at the same time.
The main thing is to dethrone the idea of trading based only on the skill of predicting the direction of the price movement. Of course, the percentage of "guessing", markedly different from 50 won't hurt at all :-)... But, if you can not break away from 50 - then use THIS FACT (i.e., to trade "fluctuations of statistics of deals results about 50-thousandth)...
Whichever way you like.
Everyone here is an adult. Everyone is well aware that the nature of the statistics is simply bound to change over time. And it is most logical to use as many independent processes running in parallel as possible at the same time.
The main thing is to dethrone the idea of trading based only on the skill of predicting the direction of the price movement. Of course, the percentage of "guessing", markedly different from 50 won't hurt at all :-)... But, if you can not break away from 50-thousand, you must use THIS FACT (that is, to trade "fluctuating statistics of deals around 50-thousand")...
Sorry, colleague, but that literally means recognizing the unpredictability of the process, its randomness, hence. And that only leads to failure sooner or later.