Lance Begs' postulates - page 12
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
That's how you do it.
and in hindsight you can say "we foresaw this level"
.... without understanding the nature of the market there is nothing to do at all....
The task is simple (in terms of wording), to find the moments where these situations arise. To look for exactly that, and not, for example, a crossover or a Fourier or something like that. This is the robustness of the strategy. We trade a specific market situation, not the indicators that are a consequence of the price, which itself is a consequence of the market situation.
In Forex I often have to solve the problem of how to recognize/understand when these situations change, because their duration is unknown and what their variability is "tied" to - what kind of nature is that?
St.Vitaliy......
If the price extremum for a period is formalized - what will change? If it's just "level testing", conclusions about the trend change will be wrong - i.e. all hope for the observance of RM postulates? Using entry/exit filters is also constrained and similarly not immune to errors.
So, we have to either enter for a short time or stay in the market longer with drawdowns, thus "following" = riding the waves of price volatility - hoping that the current will pick up and carry us to one level or another.... . :) i.e. there can be many successful methods.
Maybe setting parameters that influence the mathematical expectation is more important than trying to understand the nature of the market (for Forex), which does not (yet) exist?
bobbing on the waves of price volatility - hopingthe current will pick up and carry us to one level, another
Bingo!
It is not possible to make money on narrow market fluctuations, the main profit only from good moves.
Conclusion, a perfect exit point (fitted to the story) is as useless as a scalpel on a house building. In fact, a random entry with competent support of the position gives a positive result and does not require constant adjustment to the history
... will change the possibility of calculating "subsequent patterns"... The concept of "risk" includes the probability of price passing through "sets of patterns" (on different TFs) leading to the "ultimate goal". If the price does not fit into your "directional flags", then you are not in control of the situation. If you do not control the situation - the "situation" controls you... The concept of "risk" must include, first of all, the concept of "variants of trading", "set of patterns", which are possible during the trading, and secondly, the "safety cushion" in the form of "capability of the account to stand a drawdown".
What I love about economics is the fuzziness of the terms.
I distinguish between two risks.
1. The size of allowable losses per trade in a particular TS, its size should ensure maximum quality of equities (MA, profit factor...). It is determined by results of testing.
2. The size of capital loss when using particular TS. It depends on mental settings of the investor.
Conclusion, a perfect exit point (fitted to the story) is as useless as a scalpel on a house building. In fact, a random entry with competent position support yields positive results and does not require constant adjustment to the story
Bummer.
on mql4 look for ideal points, here too. Mathematicians, life passes...
And there's no Bentley, maybe they're looking for the wrong thing.
on mql4 look for ideal points, here too. Mathematicians, life passes...
If you really make money trading, which I personally highly doubt, you are the luckiest guy in the world.
For what you said above is nonsense.
That's it for me.