Naive beginner's strategies. - 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
In this case MO will be a wand, because it is able to automatically build a model and work with it, instead of searching for patterns manually in order to shove the logic into the Expert Advisor, etc.
If the logic is statistically traceable, it is undoubtedly more effective than "manual" formulation of patterns.
But nevertheless, an Expert Advisor must not be a "black box".
Well, then, as I understand it, you think thatWetteg's winis a fluke. Except that somewhere slipped the information that he earns good money on real accounts.
I don't know what this contestant's victory is based on).
You made an argument, I parried it. That's all.
Maybe his advisor was receiving information from astral bodies and connected to the fifth dimension, where time is overcome as space.:)
Perhaps he's doing the same thing now?:)
In fact, I think that this victory is more of an accident than a pattern. Unfortunately, that's my opinion.
Because scientifically, we don't have enough evidence to argue thatWetteg's victory is more coherent than Surgeon General's.
If you give arguments in favor of greater regularity of victory of one of participants over another, we can come to a conclusion. Without that, the degree of regularity and randomness of their wins is, scientifically speaking, exactly the same, because the result is the same.
A reasonable person always draws unambiguous conclusions, that's why he is reasonable.
You clearly overestimate the reasonableness of man...)
As the philosopher Bertrand Russell said: It is useful to put a question mark from time to time on things that have long seemed undeniable to you.
And this is true even for the most obvious things... strategies in trading are far from "most obvious."
As history shows, it is because of unequivocal conclusions that scientific and technical progress has stalled. The conviction that something living cannot exist, which we cannot see with our eyes, prevented the great biologist from promoting his theory about the existence of pathogenic bacteria, for which it is necessary to disinfect bedding in hospitals... this was not done due to prejudice and unambiguous views, and many people died of infections...
Tamas Kuhn, one of the foremost historians of science developed the paradigm theory:
1.first a particular system of thought, a system of views and beliefs is formed.
2.then certain things begin to come up that cannot be explained within these generally accepted theories and "facts.
3. But people continue to cling to the old theories and try by all means and at all costs to squeeze the "square in the cup" and thus to protect the reputation of their views and not to allow the loss of their conviction.
4. at the fourth stage when the number of inconsistencies exceeds all imaginable norms and it becomes simply impossible to go even a little further, there is a paradigm shift and the formation of a new paradigm which does not supplement but rather crosses out the old one, and people begin to admit that their unambiguous conclusions were either erroneous or incomplete and extremely narrow
You clearly overestimate the reasonableness of man...)
As the philosopher Bertrand Russell said: It is useful to put a question mark from time to time on things that have long seemed to you unquestionable.
And this is true even for the most obvious things... strategies in trading are far from "most obvious."
As history shows, it is because of unequivocal conclusions that scientific and technical progress has stalled. The conviction that something living cannot exist, which we cannot see with our eyes, prevented an outstanding scientist from promoting his theory about the existence of pathogenic bacteria, for which it is necessary to disinfect bedding in hospitals... this was not done due to prejudice and unambiguous views, and many people died of infections...
Tamas Kuhn, one of the foremost historians of science developed the paradigm theory:
1.first a particular system of thought, a system of views and beliefs is formed.
2.then certain things begin to come up that cannot be explained within these generally accepted theories and "facts.
3. But people continue to cling to old theories and try by all means and by all means to cram "the square into the ball" and thus protect the reputation of their views and not allow the loss of their conviction. because then they will have to admit that the present theoretical scheme is no good and will have to change everything.
4. on the fourth stage when the quantity of inconsistencies exceeds all conceivable norms and it becomes simply impossible even on smallest progress, there is a change of paradigm and formation of new paradigm which does not supplement, but rather crosses out the old, and people begin to recognize that their unequivocal conclusions were either erroneous or incomplete and extremely narrow
Great!
The power of thought of the classics!) It is necessary not to forget them...
You clearly overestimate the reasonableness of man...)
As the philosopher Bertrand Russell said: It is useful to put a question mark from time to time on things that have long seemed undeniable to you.
brilliant elementary, philosophers love to make poetry out of simple things. VK chick stats sometimes carry more meaning
I'm laughing :D
Here is the definition of TA:
Technical analysis is a statistical-mathematical analysis of previous quotes with prediction of subsequent prices.
Who agrees with it?
From your words -Technical Analysis is a statistical-mathematical analysis of previous quotes with prediction of future prices, it turns out that TA is a superfluous term here, it is not necessary. There is no and does not exist in the nature of no TA. Fiddler is not necessary).
I think this definition does not allow some traders to say that they do not use TA when trading. I think the term is not superfluous as it allows us to denote more briefly, the meaning and the actions that are put into this term.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7
In short, TA is everything that is not FA, what is your problem with it? ) And since TA includes indicators, accordingly it is a statistical mathematical analysis too, because indicators can be quite different
Even the FA is also TA, if some news indicator is used. That is, TA is ANY market analysis at all
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7
In short, TA is everything that is not FA, what is your problem with it? ) And since TA includes indicators, accordingly it is also a statistical mathematical analysis, because the indicators can be quite different
Even FA is TA too, if some news indicator is used.
I think the wikipedia definition of TA is wrong. The TA is an action and action cannot be equated to a set of tools. It's just illiterate. At least write like this: TA is action which uses a set of ...(this and that), in order to get ... (this and that).
... There is no and does not exist any TA. A violinist is not necessary.)
There is no TA because you don't need it?
Still, for many traders there is a TA. That's a fact. And these traders base their trading decisions on it. And trading decisions of traders in the aggregate are responsible for price movement.
If TA supporters have more money, they will move the price in their direction, eating stops of TA opponents.
I think the opponents of TA should study TA to predict the trading decisions of TA followers and guide the market.
Behind TA are real people who operate with real money. The money moves the price.