Calculation of the slope angle of the trend line. - page 25
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
What is there to understand? If the line is directed upwards, its difference with its previous value is positive, if it is directed downwards, the difference is negative (and the greater the difference in modulo, the steeper the direction). This direction indicator is averaged to miss some false short-term changes of direction. Naturally, if averaging is used, there will be a lag. There will be a lag in any case if you exclude something.
You can do something like NRTR instead of averaging. For example, when the line is directed upwards, we fix the maximum, the pullback from the maximum to the threshold will be a change of direction. This threshold could be constant, it could be proportional to std. But in this case there will also be a lag. There will always be a lag. The smaller the errors in determining the change of direction, the larger the lag, the smaller the lag, the larger the errors.
And you know, solving such problems doesn't cost an egg, they are solved in between on the fly. What's going on with you guys here? Soon you won't be able to do arithmetic without an authoritative formula.
Simple solutions don't work. Such solutions are obvious. No offense. Perhaps I didn't set the task correctly. I liked the 2 windows.
Yeah, obvious, but only understandable from the fifth explanation (probably half of it not understood). And the phenomenon here is different. Everything not understood seems magical... dangling on the horizon like a carrot on a shaft, and things are standing still. And the main thing is not to allow understanding for anything, or the illusion will collapse.
And the two windows are just a fixed number of bars to determine the change of direction... But somehow it doesn't lag. Is it OK that I'm pushing for understanding? Otherwise the illusion might collapse.
I don't have that kind of directness of thought. I go the hard way. First I look at what can be measured and calculated and only then I think about what can be done with it.
Question, how easy is it to calculate to the left, from the current bar the end of the corridor? the blue red ones are extemes. The corridor can be in relative changes of difference of lows and highs, and the speed of lows and highs can be calculated, but it is difficult. It's easier to do.
In other words, you want to know how to recognise a new channel once it has begun and confirmed. The key is to realize that the channel is already new, not old. The key word is that it has already formed. So why do you need it?
By the way, what is bar 29?
In other words, you are interested in how to recognise a new channel once it has been started and confirmed. The key is to realise that the channel is already a new channel, not an old one. The key word is already formed. So why do you need it?
By the way, what is bar 29?
No, you have to do it without confirmation or it will lag, but you have to do it without errors... and without lag... and no errors... and no lag... и... и... и...
No, no confirmation or lag, but also no errors... and no lag... and no errors... and no lag... и... и... и...
In other words, you are interested in how to recognise a new channel once it has been started and confirmed. The key is to realise that the channel is already a new channel, not an old one. The key word is already formed. So why do you need it?
By the way, what is bar 29?
Well 9 index was bar 29
Why even? Integer has quite a clear idea of decomposition: goal, objectives, known methods, practical approaches, applied approach, result, performance evaluation.
Well 9 index was bar 29
It is not necessary to mold the algorithm. You need to get into the process and describe it.