The riddle: the distribution bell rattles - the broker says the price, whoever it hits sheds tears and loses their deposit. - page 3
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
At least 10 years of history.
A living example of 10 years
When you leave town, you see a schoolboy playing ball in the fields.
and when you come back, you see that he's already bought a neighbouring plot, built a house there, babysat the kids and is making good money.
A living example of 10 years
When you leave town, you see a schoolboy playing ball in the fields.
and when you come back, you see that he's already bought a neighbouring plot, built a house there, is babysitting and earning good money.
There you go.
Broke the man's business plan.
now no one will tell him anything....
Who else is going to squeeze something 'clever' out of their brain?)
The number of losers should be greater than the number of winners (Well, or volume).
Who else is going to squeeze something "clever" out of their brain?)
What is the reason for your dissatisfaction? - all according to plan... as the topic topic-starter - started such a discussion
If you've got a good idea, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in ticks, but if you don't like it, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in volatility... - and you can go to ticks and there will be bells, you can go to price increments and there...
and what does it give? it only makes sure that 99% of price data analysis will have a random distribution law
you can spin these bells and bells indefinitely, which is what they're doing on this forum ))))
What is the reason for your dissatisfaction? - all according to plan... as the topic topic-starter - started such a discussion
If you've got a good idea, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in ticks, but if you don't like it, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in volatility... - and you can go to ticks and there will be bells, you can go to price increments and there...
and what does it give? it only makes sure that 99% of price data analysis will have a random distribution law
you can spin these bells and bells indefinitely, which is what they're doing on this forum ))))
I'm just getting tired of hearing the "c&w Don Quixote's ramblings". And the riddle is such a humorous form of a very serious monumental question. This riddle hides everything you need to trade if such a thing is possible)
I don't see much point in shutting up forum mathematicians - you should "fight" those mathematicians who write algorithms for market makers.
On the subject. The main problem is that the sample distribution of increments does not uniquely determine the real distribution of increments in the case of a process with non-stationary increments.
I see what the topic is about - the topic is about the fact that technical analysis makes no sense
I see what the topic is about - the topic is about the fact that technical analysis makes no sense
I think that's more accurate: the topic is about how no analysis makes sense at all
I think that's more accurate: the point is that no analysis at all makes sense
Exactly!) It doesn't make sense as long as it's not clear what we're analysing)
(Randomness has patterns too.)