Practice testing, reflection, discussion... - page 16
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 one will say. The topic-starter is you.
Yeah... I have to admit...
Well then, if no one else is interested, then... I already know... What's there to talk about... :-(
Yeah... I have to admit...
Well then, if no one else is interested, then... I already know... What's there to talk about... :-(
You want a dialogue?
do you want a dialogue ?
Public performance of the experiment interests me personally by the possibility, in the course of communication, to stumble upon "the very thought" which perhaps everyone is looking for, but, as usual, "you look straight at it ... and - do not see". A simple reading of the available material did not help.
I hope this is a worthy enough reason to provoke communication...
You chose to be a monologue instead of a dialogue. when you were asked for a password at the beginning, you refused. others have no motivation, they do not see what you see. And blah, blah, blah, blah. you took the right action?
You yourself have taken the "right" steps to cool down interest in the topic. Looks like the train has left the station.
Why after 16 pages you want to have a dialogue is unclear. :)
You decided to do a monologue instead of a dialogue. when you were asked for a password at the beginning, you refused. others have no motivation, they do not see what you see. And blah-blah-blah to deal with your words and take something for granted?
You yourself have taken the "right" steps to cool down interest in the topic. Looks like the train has left the station.
Why after 16 pages you want to have a dialogue is unclear. :)
Well it's obvious that making this series of deals into a separate account is akin to pouring Zhigulyov beer from the original bottle into a Czech bottle.
What difference does it make...?
In the discussion on the "Thoughts on Random" thread, a suggestion was made to observe, in a separately created thread, the PRACTICAL operation of a trading system designed to profit from fluctuations in the statistics of transaction outcomes opened in the direction indicated by a pseudo-random number generator.
Such an approach, where the market is seen purely as a random process without any informational regularities, is doomed from the outset. Dreams that one can handle the market without caring about inputs and merely controlling the size of the position are too naive. The advantage is shifted to that side of the barricades, which is the opposite of the average trader. This advantage is huge - take the spread, for example.
- Second, there are clear traces of the market makers' ability to freely manage quotes (the euro-franc story is an example). And in that light, talks about market CHAOS do not look convincing, and the search of "natural" dependencies in quotes starts to seem irrelevant;
You are partly right - but only partly. It is chaos with an admixture of randomness, not a purely random process.
What "natural" dependencies you are talking about - only you know. All the dependencies that exist are purely informational and created by humans.
- Third... If the opponents of "volume trading" are correct in their statement about inevitable loss when using, say, martingale, then the one who trades mirror-opposite should expect with the same inevitability the doubling of his start amount. However, we don't see crowds of rich anti-martingale traders around,... which means - something to think about;
No doubling up on mirror entries. The vast majority of TCs have MO commensurate with the spread, and mirroring is not as effective as you think. It still turns out to be a drain.
...
Thank you very much for your reply (speaking with sincere respect).
But, it doesn't cover the one point that I have planned to demonstrate in this thread - the "energy" (earning potential) contained in the Vibrations of the value of the outcome statistics around its regression line (for example). After all, extracting it is possible...?
I guess you misunderstand me: you still haven't gone beyond looking at the flow of quotes as a purely random process with no dependencies.
Vibrations of statistics around their averages (or their regression lines) are of course possible, but it's still the same view of the quotes.
Yeah... I have to admit...
Well then, if no one else is interested, then... I already know... What's there to talk about... :-(
Look for patterns in the quotes, or they will find you. (С)