Discussion of article "Comparative Analysis of 10 Trend Strategies" - page 2

 
ANG3110:
Not that it hurts. I'm just in a kind of critical mood today. It's not because of you. Since this morning.
I'm trying to be more positive, even when there's not much. And less of a critical mood because it's easier to criticise than to celebrate the positive... I think it helps.
 
Alexander Fedosov:
... because it's easier to criticise ...


It's harder to criticise, because it's easy to label any "against" statement as "criticism" and respond with "don't like it, don't read it" or "write better".

Everything would be perfect if this article were called "Analysing 10 Strategies". But the article is called"A Comparative Analysis of 10 Trending Strategies".

And the article doesn't:

-- a comparative analysis

-- justification that the strategies shown are trending.

So, as far as I am concerned, the topic of the article is not disclosed at all. And the conclusions drawn are dubious and unsubstantiated.

 
Andrey F. Zelinsky:


It is more difficult to criticise, because it is easy to label any statement "against" as "criticism" and respond with "don't like it, don't read it" or "write better".

Everything would be perfect if this article were called "Analysing 10 Strategies". But the article is called"A Comparative Analysis of 10 Trending Strategies".

And the article doesn't:

-- a comparative analysis

-- justification that the strategies shown are trending.

So, as far as I am concerned, the topic of the article is not disclosed at all. And the conclusions drawn are dubious and unsubstantiated.


It is easier to criticise because you can find something you don't like in any statement/article/code. And to notice and mark positive moments is more difficult psychologically, because recognising something positive in another person is for some people a manifestation of weakness. Andrew, I sometimes find it interesting to read your judgements, they are logical and adequate, but, alas, the vast majority of them are critical, not praising. That is why, purely statistically, one can conclude that it is easier for you in oppositional style. If you bring at least a dozen of your praise of the article or anywhere else from you to someone well done, everything is right, I like it, then we can talk about objectivity. And so... style is dissatisfied with everything, everything is simpler.
 
Alexander Fedosov:

It is easier to criticise, because in absolutely any statement/article/code you can find something you don't like. And it is more difficult to notice and note positive aspects psychologically, because recognising something positive in another person is a manifestation of weakness for some people. Andrew, I sometimes find it interesting to read your judgements, they are logical and adequate, but, alas, the vast majority of them are critical, not praising. That is why, purely statistically, one can conclude that it is easier for you in oppositional style. If you bring at least a dozen of your praise of the article or anywhere else from you to someone well done, everything is right, I like it, then we can talk about objectivity. And so... the style of being dissatisfied with everything, it's simpler.


What you just wrote is called "personal attacks". My post was about your article. For some reason you started looking at the "style" of my statements, and somewhere in there, it's unclear where.

You want praise for your article? I didn't like it at all. I mean, I have no praise for your article. I don't. I'm sorry. Why? I'll explain:

The title of the article is "A Comparative Analysis of 10 Trending Strategies". But there is no "comparative" analysis. And there are no "trending" strategies, as there is no justification for any strategy that it is a "trending" strategy.

What to praise in your article, if its content and conclusions do not correspond to the stated topic?

Praise your endeavour? Please: "Well done, Genka, well done. Take a pie from the shelf." [from the film "Kortik"].

 
Andrey F. Zelinsky:


What you just wrote is called "getting personal". My post was about your article. For some reason, you started looking at the "style" of my statements, and somewhere in there, it's unclear where.

You want praise for your article? I didn't like it at all. I mean, I have no praise for your article. I don't. I'm sorry. Why? I'll explain:

The title of the article is "A Comparative Analysis of 10 Trending Strategies". But there is no "comparative" analysis. And there are no "trending" strategies, because there is no justification for any strategy that it is a "trending" strategy.

What to praise in your article, if its title and conclusions do not correspond to the stated topic?

Praise your endeavour? Please: "Well done, Genka, well done. Take a pie from the shelf." [from the film "Kortik"].

Praise the one you liked (not mine, of course), please.
I have nothing else to answer you. You win.
 
Alexander Fedosov:
Praise the one you like (not mine, of course), please.
I have nothing more to say to you. You win.


Yes, by the way, you are extremely inattentive. Read my first post:

Andrey F. Zelinsky:


...

Everything would be perfect if this article was called "Analysing 10 Strategies". ...

...


My "stingy tear" of praise is quite obvious, specific, succinct, and can only be overlooked if you really want to overlook it.

 

After reading the title "A Comparative Analysis of 10 Trending Strategies" -- what I expected to read in the article and what the article is completely missing:

1. Theoretical expositions:

-- definition of trend/flat -- what is the difference

-- peculiarities/problems/approaches of trend identification, trend initiation, trend termination

2. Practical aspects -- on the example of well-known strategies (indicators are available in the terminal):

-- description of the strategy, justification that the strategy is trending

-- mechanisms for identifying the beginning/end of a trend

-- testing, analyses -- on several timeframes

-- ways to improve the strategy, in what direction you can try to develop the strategy

-- comparison with previous strategy

3. Conclusions

 
Alexander Fedosov:

It is easier to criticise, because in absolutely any statement/article/code you can find something you don't like. And it is more difficult to notice and note positive aspects psychologically, because recognising something positive in another person is a manifestation of weakness for some people. Andrew, I sometimes find it interesting to read your judgements, they are logical and adequate, but, alas, the vast majority of them are critical, not praising. That is why, purely statistically, one can conclude that it is easier for you in oppositional style. If you bring at least a dozen of your praise of the article or anywhere else from you to someone well done, everything is right, I like it, then we can talk about objectivity. And so... the style of being dissatisfied with everything is simpler.

Alexander, can you remember how many times you praised your child, I hope you have children, for the fact that he came back from a walk clean and not in torn clothes? And how many times you scolded him for soiled trousers.... Or how many times you've praised your wife, your mum for an ordinary lunch. And how many times you've expressed your displeasure for a soup that's too salty, for example.

Man in general tends not to notice the good and the smallest flaws are always conspicuous. The best praise is the absence of criticism. As well as the absence of news is the best news. If something happens, we are bound to get this unpleasant news.

So, don't take criticism as an attack.

 
Alexey Viktorov:

Alexander, can you remember how many times you praised your child, I hope you have children, for coming back from a walk clean and not in torn clothes? And how many times you scolded him for soiled trousers.... Or how many times you've praised your wife, your mum for an ordinary lunch. And how many times have you expressed your displeasure for over-salted soup, for example?

Alexei, let me answer you on the example of your comparisons. Nevertheless, we always understand the benefit of praising a child and it is quite obvious that he is motivated to not tear his trousers/take away his own toys/tie his shoelaces anymore by the praise that he has done it, rather than by the pointer at the first opportunity when he has made a mistake. We may not praise him every time for a normal meal, but we do thank him.

Human beings in general tend to overlook the good things and the smallest faults are always conspicuous. The best praise is the absence of criticism. As well as the absence of news is the best news. If something happens we are sure to get this unpleasant news.

It's more a peculiarity of modern man. No spillage, thank you very much.

So, don't take criticism as an attack.

No, let it. It's unpleasant, but it's an opportunity sometimes. A man came in - good article, thank you. Why is it good? Why did you like it? But if you don't like it, you get a super detailed analysis. As an example, my first article, there were also a lot of comments on the code, most of them were heeded, understood, corrected/added.
 

This is a strange conclusion"Therefore, the main thing we have found out is that there is no big difference in how to determine the current trend. The advantages and disadvantages of all trend strategies will be the same."- this conclusion contradicts the given test results - the scatter of results is very different, especially for variants 3, 4, 9. This means that the moment of determining the entry and exit into the market significantly affects the result, all other things being equal.

For objective perception we lack a chart with the results of optimisation - without it it is impossible to make a preliminary idea about ATS.

Can these Expert Advisors be used in real trading, without making changes - are orders and server errors ("market is closed" and so on) processed correctly?