What is a trend? - page 33
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 that's great!!!
Others don't see these either.(((
The answer is wrong.
The bad thing is that you don't distinguish between trend and intra-trend movements.
ps or you don't make the distinction.The answer is wrong.
The bad thing is that you do not distinguish between a trend and an intra-trend movement.
ps or you don't make a distinction.I can suggest that you may be confused as to which is the wave and which is the trend.
Waves and trends can exist in any TF.
Waves always exist and trends exist depending on the combination of waves.
I can suggest that you may be confused as to which is the wave and which is the trend.
Waves and trends can exist in any TF.
Waves always exist and trends depending on the combination of waves.
Strong.
Isn't a "wave" two multidirectional "trends"?
Strong.
Isn't a "wave" two differently directed "trends"?
Just to make it clear to me and everyone else, what is your definition of a wave?
Otherwise it's an empty conversation.
From a technical point of view, looking through a magnifying glass at a piece of asphalt can make us think that we are looking at a road.
In fact, what we see there won't even interest a cyclist.
Trends on ticks, n-minutes, clocks are pseudo-scientific fiction.
Relevance and fact are two different things)
Trending on minutes is just "unprofitable" and that's it) Fact is directional movement. Fantastic is more about overlaying images of evil market makers on the market and talking for volumes
About asphalt - an accurate analogy
The answer is wrong.
It's bad enough that you don't distinguish between trend and intra-trend movements.
ps or you don't make the distinction.Same old rake again) Lack of definition nullifies the constructiveness.
I.e., you use the term "trend", but you don't disclose the concept itself. This is a violation of the law of logic (the first one, in my opinion)
There is a phenomenon, it is defined based on its properties and attributes (not invented, but objective, describing the phenomenon). We have a phenomenon - a price movement. There is an attribute - the upward or downward movement that has its direction on any TF. Let's call it a "trend".
This is the beginning of our construction, but you introduce a new feature - the trend on the minutes is not a trend.
Here we need to argue, because it contradicts, because on the minutes and on the months we have the same zigzag pattern
Relevance and fact are two different things).
The trend on the minutes is simply "unprofitable" and that's all) In fact, it is a directional movement. Fiction is more about overlaying images of evil market makers on the market and speaking for volumes
About asphalt - an accurate analogy
Quite right. It is "unprofitable", but it exists.
It is a question of formalising a "trend" as such.
It's the same here, there are some forum users who are ready to refute everything, but have nothing of their own to give or say.
I think that such people should simply be ignored as those who derail constructive solutions.
With respect.
33 pages...and no one has even tried to give a coherent definition...
conclusion: a trend is a directional movement, which is felt when it is too late to enter the market :-)
There is a category of people who don't like everything, who are not happy with everything, but if you ask them "what do you think?
So here, there are some forum participants who are ready to refute everything, but cannot give or say anything of their own.
I think that such people should simply be ignored as those who derail constructive solutions.
With respect.
Clap your hands).
You described yourself well.