Making money on forex is impossible - page 3

 
zoritch:

And if the opponent is drunk, the result is unpredictable... :-)))

And this is true for all banquet participants:)
 
tara:

Any attempt to make decisions in conflict systems based on statistics is flawed and flawed due to two circumstances:

1. The adversary is no stranger to statistics.

2. The consequences of two successive decisions may well differ by orders of magnitude.


Bottom line: there are those who act on the basis of statistics; there are those who take money away from them (frontrun / correcting valuations on someone else's market impact); there are those who take money away from both, etc.

Simulate the distribution of types of bidders is quite possible (slow and stupid in the market in abundance), and therefore it is possible to build and optimal strategy. If everyone is exceptionally cunning - no one will earn.

Apply the theory of antagonistic games :D

 
tara:

This is true of all banquet participants:)
I, too, am one of the rare banquet participants who only get drunk quickly on a great occasion, then go over and give away all the secrets, and for tomorrow - I don't remember anything. I have forgotten the culture of acceptance developed in my student days (from a cut glass).
 
yosuf:
I fundamentally disagree, forex is a booming bottomless system. If everyone wins, nothing bad will happen.


A situation where everyone wins is of little interest because profit = risk free rate. And you have to live on something))
 
anonymous:


Bottom line: there are those who act on the basis of statistics; there are those who take money away from them (frontrun / correcting estimates on someone else's market impact); there are those who take money away from both, etc.

It is possible to simulate the distribution of types of bidders (there is an abundance of slow and stupid bidders in the market), and therefore it is possible to build an optimal strategy. If everyone is exceptionally cunning, no one will make money.

Apply the theory of antagonistic games :D


I've been playing antagonistic games for a long time and quite professionally, having been feeding it since the early 80s.

My personal experience does not say, it shouts that in these games one should not use statistical methods other than to estimate the outcome of an unknown process.

 
anonymous:

A win-win situation is of little interest because profit = risk free rate. You have to live on something.)

Well, in the case of the US, the option of a universal risk free rate in those states does not interfere with anything:)
 
yosuf:
I, too, have already managed to lose about 10 deposits, about 5k. Only left with the hope that I have gained 10k experience and started 15 real accounts already with the principles voiced. If I lose them too, I don't know what to do, but I know for sure I won't be able to leave Forex without winning it...

:-)
Yusuf - Jan! Good day! I have even more respect for you!
 
_Roman:
:-)
Yusuf - Jan! Good day! I have even more respect for you!
Thanks Roman, hi, in the Forex world you are for me an example of a sober and balanced approach to trading. I wish you success!
 
Debugger:
A systematic and stable earnings on forex is not possible. Trying to trade forex is to play with negative mathematical expectation followed by a guaranteed loss.
This statement is based on the results of the tests. The tests were conducted by the program. Its task was to select the timeframe, the set of indicators and entry/exit points.
Let everyone draw their own conclusions.


And I can say this :

A systematic and steady income from forex is quite possible.

Moreover, with the right organization of the process it is possible to achieve break-even, systematic and stable earnings.

This statement is based on the results of trading in real accounts.

Let everyone draw conclusions for himself. ;)

I will add:

Trying to apply the MO machine in forex is trading with a guaranteed loss.

 
avtomat:

Systematic and stable forex earnings are possible.

Moreover, if you organise the process properly, you can achieve break-even, systematic and stable earnings.

Why then do all your tractors lose sooner or later?
Reason: