Matstat Econometrics Matan - page 36
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
You seem to be saying that when you lose a game, you can reduce the loss a little by increasing the risk. You can't make a profit that way (from a losing game).
It sounds to me like the joke about "did the sick man sweat before he died" )
You can't "turn a losing economy into a profitable one without changing anything").
I never said it was possible to win a losing game by betting more.
It's about choosing the best strategy (lose later, or lose less, or win sooner). Setting specific, achievable limits, suddenly we come to an apparently paradoxical conclusion - increased risk is more profitable, i.e. more optimal than a small one.
In large numbers you can see here, right in real time: individuals who "bang on almost full" win more in total and stay here longer. They are more resilient. Minus those who get discouraged and lose interest.
Not because the grail has been discovered, just because it's a little more optimal. The result is a bit predictable anyway :-)
I didn't say that you can win a losing game by knowingly increasing your stakes.
It's about choosing the best strategy (lose later, or lose less, or win sooner). By setting specific, achievable limits, we suddenly come to an apparently paradoxical conclusion - an increased risk is more profitable, i.e. more optimal than a smaller one.
In large numbers you can see here, right in real time: individuals who "bang on about" win more in total and stay here for a long time. They are more resilient. Minus those who get discouraged and lose interest.
Not because the grail has been discovered, just because it's a little more optimal. The result is a bit predictable anyway :-)
Your reasoning is correct.
Speculators always earn more than investors and most of them lose less than investors.
I didn't say that you can win a losing game by knowingly increasing your stakes.
It's about choosing the best strategy (lose later, or lose less, or win sooner). By setting specific, achievable limits, we suddenly come to an apparently paradoxical conclusion - an increased risk is more profitable, i.e. more optimal than a smaller one.
In large numbers you can see here, right in real time: individuals who "bang on about" win more in total and stay here for a long time. They are more resilient. Minus those who get discouraged and lose interest.
Not because the grail is discovered, just because it's a little more optimal. The result is a bit predictable anyway :-)
There is also a variant of "survivor paradox" - only successful variants are placed in signals and stay there long enough).
And investors would be careful investing into something so beautiful.)
There is also a variant of "survivor's paradox" - only successful variants are placed in signals and stay there long enough).
You can't trade like that for a long time, and investors will be careful investing in such nice things.)
What the hell are investors in signals? Come down from your Heavenly Library of Science to our earth ... :-) Investments are about something else.
I've already pointed it out somewhere - the better the signal looks, the bigger the catch .
What the hell are investors in signals? Come down from your celestial science library to us on earth...:-) Investing is a bit different.
already pointed out somewhere - the better the signal looks, the bigger the catch .
In your underground practice lab the better the signal the worse it looks ?) There are plenty of those out there too)
In your underground hands-on lab, the better the signal, the worse it looks?) There are plenty of those out there too).
If there are bad signals with good readings and there are good signals with bad readings then there must be a golden mean).
Something seems to me (cross my heart, it already seems))), that should.?
Is there any slider in Matan that would centre itself, like an approximation?
Everything in the world is balanced, so there'sa slipper for all occasions. Matan isn't quite there yet).
Is there some kind of slider in maths that would centre itself, like an approximation?
Science can do a lot of geeking, but the mathematical meaning of the question is not clear to me.
Is there any slider in Matan that would centre itself, like an approximation?
the whole EMA family...
No joke - the first thing to do with experimental data is to apply the EMA.
because the experimenter knows more about the expected EMA in advance than about the final results.