Statistics, optimisation and "lucky coin" .... - page 2
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
Well, first of all, it doesn't open positions like the topicstarter's from scratch,
and second of all, it's not a grail.
Well, from the spoils of the deal - it really is a slag, doomed to failure.
And any system may be smooth after optimization in the tester, but only on history)
And any system can be graphical after optimisation in the tester, but only on history)
It seems that way to you through inexperience. There is not much to optimise in good systems.
On the eve of the weekend....
Conclusion: given all of the above, I am not specifically raising the question : 'how to live on? I am interested in the goals of optimisation and statistics, of those who are actively engaged in it...
I myself am obsessed with the idea of a coin...
But, after many years, I only got to the point that the TP with SL should be within 10-12 p... Which with the spreads of our DTs is generally difficult to comply with.
It would also be nice to take into account that in case of TP we should open a position in the same direction... (?)
And in our spreads, TP should be equal to at least SL*2.5 - otherwise all makes no sense. And to take 2.5p more when dancing in a corridor of 10-12 pips, is already a problem, because 4 pips - the norm spread (most).
Thus, it is necessary:
1. or go beyond 10-12 pips, in a corridor up to 60 pips (but then you can make only two unsuccessful deals during a week).
Either take the fork in your hands... And place the second bet when the price is reached, without waiting for the previous one to close.
>In good systems there is nothing much to optimize.
Except yield...
That's what you think because you're inexperienced. In good systems, there is not much to optimise.
I 100% agree.
Ahead of the weekend....
The amount of nonsense in the new branches is steadily increasing. Has spring really arrived...?
Azarus, you seem to be one of those people who heard something somewhere, but didn't understand what it means and what it should be applied to. Your first thesis begins with the words "There is a certain TS: "TP - X pips, SL - Y pips; ... The direction of the entry - determined by flipping a coin... "You can not read further, because what you propose is not a TS, but a random number generator. It's really senseless to optimize it - it's a fact. But to conclude on this basis that it also makes no sense to optimize any TS is either deliberate demagogy or a logical error of finding a connection where it does not exist, i.e. between TS and PRNG.
The amount of nonsense in new threads is steadily increasing. Has spring really arrived...?
Azarus, you seem to be one of those people who heard something somewhere, but didn't understand what it means and what it can be applied to. Your first thesis begins with the words "There is a certain TS: "TP - X pips, SL - Y pips; ... The direction of the entry - determined by flipping a coin... "You can not read further, because what you propose is not a TS, but a random number generator. It's really senseless to optimize it - it's a fact. But to conclude on this basis that it also makes no sense to optimize any TS is either deliberate demagogy or a logical error of finding a connection where it does not exist, i.e. between TS and PRNG.
)))) as usual - understood from what you read, not what it says, but what you wanted to understand. Who suggested you to "optimize the coin"?
The author hypothesized that the process of selecting the best TS implementation, based on PRNG on the quotes history, is identical to the process of optimizing any TS based on an indicator or combination of TA indicators on the quotes history.
Spring has sprung, but the nonsense is not there)
)))) as usual - understood from what you read, not what it says, but what you wanted to understand. Who suggested you to "optimize the coin"?
The author hypothesized that the process of selecting the best TS implementation, based on PRNG on the history of quotes, is identical to the process of optimizing any TS based on TA on the history of quotes.
Spring has sprung, but the nonsense is not there
Don't make me angry. I have nothing more to say to this nonsense.
If a TS with a stable positive expected payoff is found
and secondly there is no such thing as a graphical one.
Since the topic was about R. Pardo and his book "Developing... ".
I would be grateful for clarification of my question.
Never mind. NO optimisation of the TS will guarantee future profits. Sad, but unfortunately - a fact.