From theory to practice - page 478
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
To summarise: the price moves in a way that hurts as many market participants as possible.
It's not my statement, but I completely agree with it.
In this statement, you are assuming that market participants are only speculators aiming to make a profit and that the market is "counteracting" them.
But that is not the case.
Most of the transactions (by volume) in any market are not profit-oriented (speculative). They are currency conversions, hedging transactions, etc. that do not directly deliver profits.
And the market has no mission to "deliver profit" (or loss) to participants. The market was not invented for anyone to make a profit (as well as a loss) on it. The fact that some speculators take profits from speculative trades is simply a side effect, an exploitation of market features. It's like a road that was created for driving, not for taking profit, but some people put a café near the road and still make profit, although the road wasn't invented for that.
The market is designed to bring the buyer and the seller together at a price that suits both (think of the usual bazaar where you buy citrus fruits).
Because of this principle of market design, the price moves in such a way as to ensure the maximum amount of transactions for a given supply and demand.
There's some rabble looking for the unknown here, entertaining themselves with illusions...
Having said that, have you tried looking in the mirror?
I would disagree. There is less money in the market only by the part paid to intermediaries (they have a unidirectional pump).
The rest is a zero-sum game, with some losses and some gains.
No, it's a direct consequence of the 95/5 rule of thumb. Which, in turn, follows from the fundamental law of trade in free competition.
However, this is all IMHO.
one of the posts that should be framed for anyone who does not know this
and read and reread until the bullshit is out of his head.
+
There are just as many liquidity providers in Forex as there are consumers. They are all like a pyramid, on different levels. And all together live the same life, or rather, the same goal. The sluggish, clumsy or greedy players suffer losses and are the profit providers for the liquidity providers. Averaging machines work, like liquidity providers, against the market. But they do not shape the market. Perhaps that is why a robot that works on an averaging network strategy with low risk and a large deposit is almost eternal in pre-crisis times.
In this statement, you are assuming that market participants are only speculators who aim to make a profit, and that the market "counteracts" them.
In this statement, you are assuming that market participants are only speculators aiming to make a profit and that the market is "counteracting" them.
But that is not the case.
Most of the transactions (by volume) in any market are not profit-oriented (speculative). They are currency conversions, hedging transactions, etc. that do not directly deliver profits.
And the market has no mission to "deliver profit" (or loss) to participants. The market was not invented for anyone to make a profit (as well as a loss) on it. The fact that some speculators take profits from speculative trades is simply a side effect, an exploitation of market features. It's like a road that was created for driving, not for taking profit, but some people put a café near the road and still make profit, although the road wasn't invented for that.
The market is designed to bring the buyer and the seller together at a price that suits both (think of the usual bazaar where you buy citrus fruits).
Because of this principle of market design, the price moves in such a way as to ensure the maximum amount of transactions for a given supply and demand.
+100500
Well, that's a point in itself))
And after reading the last 3 pages I almost fell under the table ten times. It's been a long time since I've seen something like that. It's more fun on the forum)).
In this statement, you are assuming that market participants are only speculators aiming to make a profit and that the market is "counteracting" them.
But that is not the case.
Most of the transactions (by volume) in any market are not profit-oriented (speculative). They are currency conversions, hedging transactions, etc. that do not directly deliver profits.
And the market has no mission to "deliver profit" (or loss) to participants. The market was not invented for anyone to make a profit (as well as a loss) on it. The fact that some speculators take profits from speculative trades is simply a side effect, an exploitation of market features. It's like a road that was created for driving, not for taking profit, but some people put a café near the road and still make profit, although the road wasn't invented for that.
The market is designed to bring the buyer and the seller together at a price that suits both (think of the usual bazaar where you buy citrus fruits).
Because of this principle of market structure, the price moves to provide the maximum amount of transactions at a given supply and demand.
The wish is the best, but it is the same as always.
The market is mainly speculators, no fool would hedge the market at a loss.
The more you take away from others, the more you gain.
This is why there is no fundamentals in the market, there is no tehanalysis, there is only big money that decides where the market goes.
But there is still a chance, big money can only be beaten by big intelligence.
We wanted what was best, but it turned out to be the same as always.
The market is mostly speculators; no fool would hedge at a loss.
How much more you take away from others is how much more you get.
This is why there is no fundamentals in the market, there is no tehanalysis, there is only big money that decides where the market goes.
But there is still a chance, big money can only be beaten by big intelligence.
Ooh. By the way your post is good as fertilizer for immature newbies.
Having said that phrase, have you tried looking in the mirror?
If there is an opinion that only profit is responsible for the mind, honour and dignity of a trader (shameful formulation, but I am telling it like it is), then I am entitled to extreme, harsh judgments. Trading on my TS has given for 5 months though small (+7% on 51 carried out transactions), but plus. Well, ok. Let it be 0%. But it wasn't a loss! So, I'm not ashamed of this branch, but there is no grail.
Something's missing... Missing is a parameter like Hearst, ACF or non-gentropy. Perhaps taking High/Low into account in calculations or using a neural network as a classifier...
I would like to see and participate in the discussion of these specific directions, but what instead? Some vague fragments of phrases, secrets...
What secrets could you have, for example, apart from a new way of weaving noodles? I don't understand... I refuse to understand.
We need themed forum threads with moderators like Matemat. Otherwise, it's all a laughing stock...