and wandering around randomly again... - page 62
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 what have I been telling you all along?!
It's already called the probability of a particular series of outcomes matching a set of conditions... not the probability of a particular series of outcomes falling out
To get your "... probability of falling a series with 12 heads and 8 tails or 11:9 or 7:13..." you FIRST have to have a randomly falling "series" (which will fall out with exactly the same probability as my 20 heads), and then COUNT the NUMBER of eagles (!)... And it is the RESULTS of such COUNTS, being drawn on a histogram, that will start to form your favourite "dome" with a probability density (!), and not the statistics of frequency of falling out of each particular series.
Now tell me, are you still going to claim that "...with equal probability in an infinite cyclethe trajectory will always tend towards this ratio (50:50)which means to zero..."?(https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/193378/page53#comment_5245824) _ After all, your words "... the probability of falling 20 eagles in a row 1111111111111111111111 or falling 12 eagles :8 tails in a sequence 112221212111221122211 then the probability will be the same..." unambiguously mean that the trajectory does not tend towards anything... and moves purely arbitrarily
that's bullshit..... again you don't get it... you just twisted my words.... how can I talk to you if you're waist-deep in wood?
I would posit that in an infinite loop, the trajectory will tend to zero! to that 50:50 ratio. i explained the reason why in human terms.
if the probability is initially 50:50 then the distribution of heads and tails YES ALWAYS tends to that ratio.......it's a law of probability theory...
if we make a bet and you bet on 20 eagles and i bet on 13:7 you will inevitably lose with a bang in an infinite cycle, as my 13: 7 will fall out much more often than your 20 eagles in a row.... I don't get it!
you cardboard fool, my words.
"Because your words "... the probability of getting 20 eagles in a row 1111111111111111111111 or getting 12 eagles :8 tails in a sequence 112221212111221122211 then the probability will be the same..." unambiguously mean that the trajectory doesn't tend towards anything... ...and moves purely arbitrarily."
mean only that the falling out of 12: 8 tails in that particular sequence will be equally probable, I underlined specially for the lambs...
in an arbitrary sequence 12: 8 have a much higher probability of falling out than 20 eagles.... incommensurably higher...and the series will always tend towards the most uniform falling out...eventually to zero
in a random sequence of 12: 8 have a much higher probability of falling out than 20 eagles.... incommensurably higher...and it will always be the series that tends to fall out most evenly...eventually to zero
this rule does not work in the market. Test it on the price movements on the charts. You will see for yourself. Because there are three different coins in the market. With equal centres of gravity, and with both upward and downward bias. Losing begins only when analysis of only one coin is used, but it doesn't analyse that a coin is likely to be changed.
There are clear, moments in the market when a coin change is probable. It can also be false. But in any case, you always have to accept the new variable and rebuild. Even if it will be a mistake. In the distance it will give you that you will always be in the direction where the main movement goes.
Also, every movement in your direction + by a certain amount of points you need to start exactly the same cycle. In other words, you have to buy some more. And to stop all cycles except the first one, when the price shows the probability of change of a coin.
Therefore, it is possible to make money only when most of the table is played in collusion. To take money away from those who play alone.
this rule does not work in the market. Test it on the price movements on the charts. You will see for yourself. Because there are three different coins in the market. With equal centres of gravity, and with both upwards and downwards shifts. Losing begins only when analysis of only one coin is used, but it doesn't analyze that a coin is likely to be changed.
There are clear, moments in the market when a coin change is probable. It can also be false. But in any case, you always have to accept the new variable and rebuild. Even if it will be a mistake. In the distance it will give you that you will always be in the direction where the main movement goes.
Also, every movement in your direction + by a certain amount of points you need to start exactly the same cycle. In other words, you have to buy some more. And to stop all cycles except the first one, when the price shows the probability of change of a coin.
That's why it is possible to make money only when most of the table is played in collusion. To take money from those who play alone.
You don't understand what's being argued about and you're arguing about it. Kent did not say anything about the majority, but he said that he would make money on ANY move, including the sb/eagle, even playing against him, he does not care what the move would be. No one has talked to him about the market for a long time now, because it would give him even more maneuvering power. They just hit him on the head with a volume of probability theory from time to time, and that's all. So you're talking to the wrong people, tell Kent about it.
What kind of "random wandering"? Again models, again abstractions, everything that is not understood is replaced by a stupid model, when there are not many who can face the truth and work with what is, buying and selling guided by their own EXPERIENCE and taking responsibility for the consequences.
Nothing is known until bets are placed!
When a man makes a trading decision, he is responsible for it! To open a position is to decide where the market will go.
What kind of "random wandering"? Again models, again abstractions, everything that is not understood is replaced by a stupid model, when there are not many who can face the truth and work with what is, buying and selling guided by their own EXPERIENCE and taking responsibility for the consequences.
Nothing is known until bets are placed!
When a man makes a trading decision, he is responsible for it! To open a position is to decide where the market will go.
What are you talking about...
Bets have been placed, what is known?
The market doesn't follow your decision.
You're getting senile...
Katya Savkina's corridors from 1Bhttp://forum.forexpeoples.ru/showthread.php?t=42016
Thank you, at least there's something to read.