The most banal trading strategy - page 42

New comment
 
secret:

The formula is much simpler:

Difference = price - SMA.

For the same difference trajectory, you can pick up completely different price and SMA trajectories. I gave an example above.

So I wouldn't be so confident about a "hard link".

I'm getting tired... I thought such a simple thing was clear even to elementary schoolchildren... You can't "pick up" anything. Wake up. You have SMA and price rigidly linked, by definition of what is SMA. The formula above is that very definition turned inside out. There is nothing else there. As far as your "example" is concerned, all it means is that a price forecast that returns to zero will still be the same as a price that "stands still". It will still "crawl along the forecast".
 
mikhael1983isakov:
I'm getting tired... I thought such a simple thing was clear even to elementary schoolchildren... You can't "pick up" anything. Wake up. You have SMA and price rigidly linked, by definition of what is SMA. The formula above is that very definition turned inside out. There is nothing else there.

It remains for you to show a positive trading result. That will be the proof that your theory is correct.

 
Uladzimir Izerski:

It remains for you to show a positive trading result. This will be proof that your theory is correct.

I am not setting out any theory here. Knowing how the SMA is considered is not a theory. I am stating perfectly obvious elementary things. The only thing I haven't mentioned is how to decompose the price difference signal and the SMA into two (one always positive, the other always negative) to make it easier to predict the price difference signal and the SMA.

The recent posts are about the relationship between the price difference and the SMA and the price prediction. So there is no such a question, no proof of this fact is not required to any reasonable person - he understands everything at once, looking at the formula that determines the SMA, and converting it to the form I showed above.

 
mikhael1983isakov:

I am not setting out any theory here. Knowledge as considered by the SMA is not theory. I am stating perfectly obvious elementary things. The only thing I haven't mentioned is how to decompose the price difference signal and the SMA into two (one always positive, the other always negative) to make it easier to predict the price difference signal and the SMA.

The recent posts are about the relationship between the price difference and the SMA and the price prediction. So there is no such question, no proof of this fact is not required to any reasonable person - he understands everything at once, looking at the formula that determines the SMA, and converting it to the form I showed above.

It seems to me that R decomposition is needed only for accurate prediction. Otherwise we can do without it.
 
Alexander Fedosov:
It seems to me that R decomposition is only necessary for prediction accuracy. As it is, you can do without it.
Oh my God. At least one sane person who can understand the meaning of what he has read.
 
mikhael1983isakov:

I am not setting out any theory here. Knowledge as considered by the SMA is not theory. I am stating perfectly obvious elementary things. The only thing I have omitted is how to decompose the price difference signal and the SMA into two (one always positive, the other always negative) to make it easier to predict the price difference signal and the SMA.

But the recent posts are discussing the relationship between the SMA and the price difference prediction. So there's no need to ask that, any reasonable person would understand it looking at SMA equation and converting it to SMA.

Barring what we have not been shown, the banal channeling strategy, on which quantum physicists A_K 1st and 2nd have been fighting for 1.5 years in the TP topic. A_K just lacks the key, and is waiting for the messiah who will give him that key.
You've been waiting in the TP thread).
 
Yuriy Asaulenko:
Leaving aside what we have not been shown, the banal strategy of working in the channel, on which A_K 1st and 2nd have been fighting for 1.5 years in the TP thread. A_K just lacks the key, and is waiting for the messiah who will give him that key.
You have been waiting in the TiP thread.
And here is a man who is unable to understand the meaning of what he has read. He sees something of his own, which has nothing to do with what I have written. Some kind of channels (although I have never heard that word in this entire thread), and so on. A good example of insanity.
 
mikhael1983isakov:
However, a person who is incapable of understanding the meaning of what he has read. He sees something of his own, which has nothing to do with what I have written. Some kind of channels (although I have not heard that word once in this entire thread), and so on. A good example of insanity.

Easy ... There are a lot of complaints about your presentation style ...

The second "Chinese warning" is

Forum on trading, automated trading systems and trading strategy testing

The most obvious trading strategy

Sergey Golubev, 2019.03.19 09:21

Just a reminder forum rules (in short) - https://www.mql5.com/ru/about/rules

  1. When communicating on this site, be polite. Refrain from comments that may offend or insult other visitors.
  2. Negative discussion of any banking, brokerage or other financial institutions is not permitted.
  3. Openly expressing personal relationships between members of the community will be discouraged.
  4. The use of obscene language, posting of advertising, spam and flooding is not permitted.
  5. Repeated violations of the rules, ignoring the comments of the moderator, and even more - openly disrespectful to the Administration of the Internet resource, will result in blocking the account.
  6. The site administration has the right to make any changes to the rules that it deems necessary.
 
mikhael1983isakov:
And here's a man who is incapable of making sense of what he has read. He sees something of his own, which has nothing to do with what I wrote. Some kind of channels (although the entire thread has never heard that word), and so on. A good example of insanity.
That is, you don't understand that you are working with a price distribution with M = SMA. The neighborhoods of the distribution form the channel in which price moves.
Well, okay, bygones are bygones.
 
Sergey Golubev:


The second "Chinese warning" is

A Chinese warning is known to be something that should simply be ignored, for no action will follow the shaking of the air. From Wiki:

The expression emerged in connection with the aggravation of US-China relations in the 1950s and 1960s concerning the so-called Taiwan issue. The U.S., without recognising the communist power in China (but recognising the Chiang Kai-shek regime), carried out reconnaissance flights over China's territorial waters. China was taking note of all US violations of its air and water space. For each such violation, the Chinese government used diplomatic channels to send a so-called "warning" to the U.S. side, but took no action. All these warnings were numbered. Since U.S. violations of Chinese air and waterspace, especially in the Taiwan Strait area, were not uncommon during those years, the numbering of the warnings exceeded many hundreds. It is difficult to estimate the exact number of warnings issued by China. Over 900 were known to have been issued by the end of 1964 alone. The Chinese government's "latest warnings" have been regularly broadcast by news agencies and have become the talk of the town.

Thus, to call something a "Chinese warning" is to deliberately deliberately disparage it (being called). It's quite wrong to call forum rules a "Chinese warning".

1...353637383940414243444546474849...55
New comment