Teach me how to make money. - page 10
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's been a month since the start of the system tests version beta 1.1 small revision on the intensity of the move the accuracy of entry brought to more or less sufficient drawdown - with the automatic (which is prescribed at the moment) will be enough to quickly select trading instruments with high volatility at entry and more accurately choose the entry point... Revision in the process of optimizing the tasks assigned to the Expert Advisor.
It's been a month since the beginning of the system tests version beta 1.1 small improvement on the intensity of the move the accuracy of entry brought to more or less sufficient drawdown - if you have an automaton (which is prescribed at the moment) will be faster enough to choose trading instruments with high volatility at entry and more accurate to select the entry point... Improvement in the process of optimizing the tasks set before the Expert Advisor.
______________
The "Player's Ruin" article's statements in relation to the forex market are completely incorrect.
First, that we have an unequal obverse and reverse of the coin (previously talked about the spread).
Increase Sl=TP-Srpread to a value much larger than Srpread. So Spread tends to equal the value of BM, i.e. up to a few thousand points, which is impossible. It may not survive in a sequence of 1000 trades, even using many pairs. But that's just the flowers or even buds. In a trend, the obverse and the reverse lose even their approximate equivalence. And so the statistics of outcomes in a trend is completely inapplicable to a flat. The same problem of Flat-Trend.
Let us define their boundary and the grail problem is solved. Even just by trading on Machs.
Second: The capital of the players is too different. The capital of the market player (B) tends to infinity.
The width of the channel (B boundary) tends to infinity as well. The path to the boundary of channel A is infinitesimally small, which ensures that most players will drain.
What does "Player Wreckage" have to offer? Only that at n-steps tending to 1000 the player-trader trading very small lots (relative to his capital) will definitely achieve a positive, though insignificant, result. And then you really need to have a slow draining TS.
prikolnyjkent:
______________
The "Player's Ruin" article's statements in relation to the forex market are completely incorrect.
First, the fact that we have unequal obverse and reverse of the coin (previously talked about the spread).
Increase Sl=TP-Spred to a value much larger than Spred. So that Spred would aspire to BM value, i.e. up to several thousand points is impossible. You may not survive in a sequence of 1000 trades even using many pairs. But this is only the flowers or even buds. In a trend, the obverse and the reverse lose even their approximate equivalence. And so the statistics of outcomes in a trend is completely inapplicable to a flat. The same problem of Flat-Trend.
Let us define their boundary and the grail problem is solved. Even just by trading on Machs.
Second: The capital of the players is too different. The capital of the market player (B) tends to infinity.
The width of the channel (B boundary) tends to infinity as well. The path to the boundary of channel A is infinitesimal, which ensures that most players will drain.
What does "Player Wreckage" have to offer? Only that at n-steps tending to 1000 the player-trader trading very small lots (relative to his capital) will definitely achieve a positive, though insignificant, result. And then you really need to have a slowly draining TS.
I thinkthat in order to make a losing TS profitable it is enough to trade against its signals. It must have occurred to almost every beginner in forex. And, if he suggests it, it means that he cannot program in mql, otherwise he would have checked this theoretical assumption in practice long ago, and his beautiful dream would have crashed against the prose of life).
The "Player's Ruin" article's statements in relation to the forex market are completely incorrect.
First, the fact that we have unequal obverse and reverse of the coin (previously talked about the spread).
Increase Sl=TP-Srpread to a value much larger than Srpread. So Spread tends to equal the value of BM, i.e. up to a few thousand points, which is impossible. It may not survive in a sequence of 1000 trades, even using many pairs. But that's just the flowers or even buds. In a trend, the obverse and the reverse lose even their approximate equivalence. And so the statistics of outcomes in a trend is completely inapplicable to a flat. The same problem of Flat-Trend.
Let us define their boundary and the grail problem is solved. Even just by trading on Machs.
Second: The capital of the players is too different. The capital of the market player (B) tends to infinity.
The width of the channel (B boundary) tends to infinity as well. The path to the boundary of channel A is infinitesimally small, which ensures that most players will drain.
What does "Player Wreckage" have to offer? Only that at n-steps tending to 1000 the player-trader trading very small lots (relative to his capital) will definitely achieve a positive, though insignificant, result. And then you really need a slow draining TS.
Why bother writing so many letters without paying attention to the fact that I wrote in black and white, in Russian, to my dearmt4trade in a posthttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/158349/page3#1031331: "...forget about the description..." (!). (!)
I'm not talking"about the forex market". I'm talking about the STATISTICS OF THE EXCHANGE (!!!).
Take some EXACT STATISTICS - and let's talk about them
Theprikolnyjkent believes that in order to make a losing TS profitable, it is enough to trade against its signals. This has probably occurred to almost everyone who started working in forex. And, if he suggests such a thing, it means that he cannot program in mql, otherwise he would have checked this theoretical assumption in practice long ago, and his beautiful dream would have crashed against the prose of life).
Take a particular Exodus statistic - and let's talk about it
let's talk aboutHER.
"Again - creative interest"-mimi.
The epidemic of passing off one's own assumptions as the thoughts of the other person.
And what is this epidemic of passing off your assumptions as the thoughts of your interlocutor...
The question is, what is the meaning of this phrase, what is the difference between the right and the wrong trading signal?
"Look at the STATISTICS OF THE OUTPUTS - YOU WILL SEE A LOT OF INTEREST" - that's what I, not without reason, think is REALLY interesting
I thought so too at first . No. It's much more complicated and confusing than that.
You, likeprorab in the toothy Martingale thread, have every criticism on the subject perfectly framed by LOGIC OF DISCUSSION and VARIOUS ARGUMENTS.
You are very pleasant interlocutors... and worthy opponents