Who trades on levels share their experiences - page 58

New comment
 
Sergey Lazarenko:

I will not swear, I will explain, in the morning Gerchik gives levels from which one should (can) trade with a short stop during the trading day, the technique is described in a book by Gerchik (Course of an active trader), in general, the algorithm for breakdowns is the same in different authors, and setting a stop is also the same, I gave this book8 a couple pages ago), I started throwing accusations, like now on the euro buy should be, I replied, so a stop and all. They started to rip me off. What kind of stop? I did everything I could.

The topic invites you to share your experiences.
Experience is what you've done yourself.
You can make a theory out of experience.
Share someone else's theory is probably also useful, but to defend its benefits can only be after their own positive experience.
And it is possible that this is the reason for the misunderstandings that occur here.
 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
The topic invites you to share your experiences.
Experience is something you have done yourself.
You can make a theory out of experience.
Sharing someone else's theory is probably also useful, but defending its usefulness can only be done after your own positive experience.
And it is possible that this is the reason for the misunderstanding that we are experiencing here.
A ray of light in a dark kingdom. That's what I keep saying, but I don't get it.
 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
The topic invites you to share your experiences.
Experience is something you have done yourself.
You can make a theory out of experience.
Sharing someone else's theory is probably also useful, but defending its usefulness can only be done after your own positive experience.
It is possible that this is the reason for the misunderstanding that we are experiencing here.

Ah, I didn't know that.

 
Sergey Lazarenko:

Oh, I didn't know that.

If you had more experience, you would have formulated TOR. And would have written (ordered) an Expert Advisor, to collect statistics.
After collecting the statistics, you would get a 50/50 total on the signals. And quite possibly with a normal distribution.
After all this, you would think about how to make the odds in your favour, and that would be the end of your enthusiasm for the system.
In the meantime, until the first flush (at best).
 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
If you had more experience, you would have formulated TOR. And would write (order) an adviser to collect statistics.
After collecting the statistics, you would get a 50/50 total for the signals. And quite possibly with a normal distribution.
After that, you'd be wondering how to outbid yourself, and that would be the end of your enthusiasm for the system.
But in the meantime, until the first drawdown (at best).

But the problem is that the system is not formalized until the first draw.)

The system is not formalized until it is fully automatic.

The system is not formalized until it is fully automated, otherwise it would not be used in videoclips - some kid in the basement developed a robot and put it up, and goodbye PR.

 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
If you had more experience, you would have formulated the terms of reference. And you would write (order) an Expert Advisor, to collect statistics.
After collecting the statistics, you would get a 50/50 total for the signals. And quite possibly with a normal distribution.
After that, you'd be wondering how to outbid yourself, and that would be the end of your enthusiasm for the system.
In the meantime, until the first flush (at best).

When you put an owl in the market, it's not 1+1, people trade there with their desires, so you understand, it's not an inanimate engine, so no one can write an owl that works, but they will write it for a certain situation (for private use). It cannot be transposed into an algorithm

 
Maxim Kuznetsov:

Intuitive levels advisor ? where to find such a wizard :-)

The system is not formalized to be fully automatic.

Otherwise, it would not be used in videoclips - once you show it, some kid in the basement builds a robot, posts it and goodbye PR.

If the system is on a shamanic intuitive level, it is not a system. Which, however, does not prevent you from making a profit.
In this case, if it cannot be formalized, just repeat it, derive profit. And call the theme "who has the most profits".
 
Sergey Lazarenko:

The market is not 1+1, people trade there, with their own desires, so you understand, it is not an inanimate engine, so no one can write an owl that works, they will write it for some situation (for a private one), the market has a human soul. It cannot be transposed into an algorithm.

That is very well said.

 
Maxim Kuznetsov:

An advisor on intuitively placed levels ? where to find such a wizard :-)

The system is not formalized to be fully automatic.

The system is not formalized until it is fully automatic, otherwise it would not be used in videoclips - just show it once, and some kid in the basement develops a robot and publishes it, and goodbye, PR.

They may be anchored to key trend points and sometimes get detached from them. Just get to the bottom of the subject and then draw a conclusion.

 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
If the system is at a shamanistic intuitive level, it is not a system. Which, however, does not prevent you from making a profit.
In that case, if it cannot be formalised, just repeat it, take the profit. And call the topic "who has the most profits".

all of it can be formalised, otherwise there is nothing to fall back on

1...515253545556575859606162636465...77
New comment