Sensation! A profitable strategy for playing beagle has been found! - page 8
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
mate... :-) my personal experience shows... it is possible to win - 3 years of almost daily trading...
---
these are the "advisors" from the articles you cited...
What is Martingale?
What is Martingale and does it make sense to use it?
I'm going to shake them up a bit - and I'll post the Profitable variants as a result....
I'm intrigued...
This smells like a Nobel Prize.
mate... :-) my personal experience shows... that you can win - 3 years of practically daily trading...
Ah! so it was necessary to warn at once, that you are a lotus-like navel of the world subverting laws of being. I guarantee no one would have even dared to doubt.
here are those "advisors" from the articles you cited...
What is Martingale?
What is Martingale and does it make sense to use it?
i'll shake them up a bit and i'll post Variants which are profitable as a result....
On the first article, too, don't forget to post the advisor. Yeah. And don't forget to include orlando in both EAs.
No, you have to use an odd parity. That's what's wrong, otherwise it's fine.
In general, man, why don't you study MQEl and write programs in a proper language?
Well, if you have to...
generator
bars
There is nothing wrong with generators, to put it mildly, in all systems, in the sense that they are sufficiently random for the modelling principle in question. The problem is simply the other ... :о)
There's nothing wrong with generators in all systems, to put it mildly, in the sense that they are random enough for the modelling principle in question. The problem is simply the other ... :о)
Not at all. The Cish oscillator can't be used like that. That's exactly the problem. when even\numbered, it gives amazing results, when in the usual way, the results are trivial.
If floor(rnd(2)) - is a parity operation on a number, the generator in this program will be considered to have passed the parity check.
Not at all. The Cish oscillator can't be used like that. That's exactly the problem. when even\numbered, it gives amazing results, when in the usual way, the results are trivial.
If floor(rnd(2)) - is an operation of parity of number, then it will be considered that in this program the generator was checked for parity.
If I understand correctly, there are two issues:
(1) The author's result. I think there's a serious error in it when going to bars (the generator has nothing to do with it) and his argument of "periodicity" of charts for large windows seems to me farfetched or drawn out
(2) The question of the use of certain s.c. generators. Long time ago I abandoned this topic (matcad is enough), but I remember that on one of prof. fora (maybe on exbity) this question was thoroughly discussed and it seems that if "properly", then a C indicator can be used. But I don't remember the details and subtleties.
this is an unsubstantiated assertion - EXAMPLE in the studio... :-)
Ahha :) endless?
______________
Oppa, I get it. Everybody start believing, and it will appear :) . All right, everyone have faith in Martin!
If I understand correctly, there are two issues:
(1) The author's result. I think there's a serious error in his transition to bars (the generator has nothing to do with it at all) and his argument of "periodicity" of charts for large windows seems to me to be far-fetched or drawn out
(2) The question of the use of certain s.h. generators. I've abandoned this theme for a long time (matcad is enough), but I remember that on one of prof. fora (maybe on exbity) this question was thoroughly discussed and it seems that if "wisely", a C indicator can be used. But I don't remember the details and peculiarities.
It would be great if you could finally read carefully everything that has been written on the subject in this thread. I hope all misunderstandings will disappear on their own. I'm just tired of explaining the same thing.
It would be great if you finally carefully re-read everything that has been written on the subject in this thread. I hope that all misunderstandings disappear on their own. I'm just tired of explaining the same thing.
In this thread, as in other threads, you can always count several sub-topics, already or not yet corresponding to the main one (you have read the title of this thread). Of the variety, I've highlighted two points that I've encountered and commented on. I do not really understand how it is possible to obtain such a candlestick chart with a total mismatch ofboundaries, even on any generator, but probably it is possible, really, why deny the "obvious". I did not find the answer in the subject. I asked the author, but in general it does not matter.
This thread "... A Cish generator cannot be used like this. The problem is exactly this. When parity gives amazing results, when used in the usual way, the results are trivial." It was discussed not only here and with my answer I, of course, did not bring anything new, except a small remark which I myself am not sure about (somewhere it was discussed on exbite and such a problem was solved somehow). What is your problem?
to:grash
It's actually quite simple. The first graph is just 10,000 ticks, this is the figure I generated thinking that 10,000 ticks should be enough for eyes and ears:
Then clever people explained that 10,000 ticks is clearly not enough to observe SB (as you can see in the graph it really is, deviations from 1 are very insignificant). Then I modified the program and generated already 1,000,000 ticks. For simplicity I have placed them in bars, of course the diapason has widened (in general it is quite a different chart) but because of an interesting property of the generator C the figure has appeared so:
I found it very interesting and decided to share the results with the community, after which I was banned by elet on http://club.investo.ru/ and was repeatedly thrown mud in this thread.
This graph turned out to be due to the use of even/odd check. If you use a different condition, for example >16384 the result will be much more ambiguous.
Z.U. Now I think, maybe write a letter to ANSI C, and get outraged, what the hell is wrong? Why your random generator made me lose respect? Are you guys eating pancakes? Fix it!!! :)))
to:grash
It's actually quite simple. The first graph is just 10,000 ticks, this is the figure I generated thinking that 10,000 ticks should be enough for eyes and ears:
Then clever people explained that 10,000 ticks is clearly not enough to observe SB (as you can see in the graph it really is, deviations from 1 are very insignificant). Then I modified the program and generated already 1,000,000 ticks. For simplicity I have placed them in bars, of course the diapason has widened (in general it is quite a different chart) but because of an interesting property of the generator C the figure has appeared so:
I found it very interesting and decided to share the results with the community, after which I was banned by elet on http://club.investo.ru/ and was repeatedly thrown mud in this thread.
This graph turned out to be due to the use of even/odd check. If you use a different condition, for example >16384 the result will be much more ambiguous.
Z.U. Now I think, maybe write a letter to ANSI C, and get outraged, what the hell is wrong? Why I lost respect because of your random generator? Are you guys eating pancakes? Fix it!!! :)))
It's all clear now, thanks, (a bit wrapped up on my project :o))). I thought you had the whole row pictured, somehow it's not so obvious (in 2007 office there seems to be no limit on the number of records, and which one you use I don't know). The only question is - what kind of check do you use? I think it's very important. Just if, for example, expect to appear an integer from a generator that generates an arbitrary number in some range, and then forms a series - it's just not correct, and maybe you should not rush to write in such a respected community. Or do you have a generator that generates an integer at once?