Market patterns - page 12

New comment
 
bas:
There's no discussion of that in the public domain. Fortunately.)
Well, we'll just have to stew in our own juices then.
 
There are regularities. You can make money, there are plenty of examples, and it must be remembered as an axiom. The market is life, you have to live by it, and not look for a way to make a quick buck. In fact, there are many regularities, and there are so many that it would take a lifetime to enumerate them. The thing is that they are so unobvious and nontrivial that they are difficult for a normal person to understand. All these regularities come from the source, from the glass, but they will always be there. The market is very much like a traffic jam, in general it is chaotic traffic and if you drive in one lane (buy and hold) you will arrive sooner or later. But if you always have to change lanes, you either lose time or win. A traffic jam is chaos consisting of separate individuals. All lanes in general move the same way, but at any given moment, one moves faster than the others, and it depends on what's ahead, on the mass of circumstances. And at different points in time, those circumstances have a different effect on the series.
Speaking of non-trivial thinking: I have an acquaintance who has been successfully trading for several years, with his hands, on some kind of gut feeling. He earns good money just by trading. He is a total junkie, and he earns money thanks to this, he sees what others do not see, because he thinks in the wrong way.
 
I applied as a pattern the statement that the market is SB. I performed an experiment on history. I took the future average volatility and applied the drunken sailor formula to it. I predicted the movement for a day, week, month. The further the forecast is, the more accurate the results obtained. I used to make 15-minute forecasts. For instance, according to the forecast the price should pass 250 points in a month and indeed it passed these points with the accuracy of up to 5 points. But the problem is that it depends on the reference point. As a result, this coincided in 50% of cases. So it turns out that the market is only half the time of the sb. The rest half of it is controlled by something.
Then I applied spectral analysis to predict each successive candle. I was amazed at the results. I predicted the whole candle, i.e. ohlc, sometimes everything matched up to 1 point, it was just unimaginable to see that when an identical candle appears in real life. But after collecting more than 1000 data I understood that the candlesticks coincide 50% of the time. That is, the market really has this regularity, but it appears in 50% of cases. The same is true for the forecasting of an entire price series applying spectrum analysis. It is exactly 50%. In fact, it is a regularity as well, but it's not obvious as I wrote in the previous post. It can be applied.
 
223231:
I applied as a pattern the statement that the market is SB. I performed an experiment on history. I took the future average volatility and applied the drunken sailor formula to it. I predicted the movement for a day, week, month. The further the forecast is, the more accurate the results obtained. I used to make 15-minute forecasts. For instance, according to the forecast the price should pass 250 points in a month and indeed it passed these points with the accuracy of up to 5 points. But the problem is that it depends on the reference point. As a result, this coincided in 50% of cases. So it turns out that the market only works half the time. The rest half is controlled by something.
Then I applied spectral analysis to predict each successive candle. I was amazed at the results. I predicted the whole candle, i.e. ohlc, sometimes everything matched up to 1 point, it was just unimaginable to see that when an identical candle appears in real life. But after collecting over 1000 data I understood that the candlesticks coincide 50% of the time. That is, the market really has this regularity, but it appears in 50% of cases. The same is true for the forecasting of an entire price series applying spectrum analysis. It is exactly 50%. In fact, it is a regularity as well, but it's not obvious as I wrote in the previous post. It can be applied.
Any forecasting system rarely gives more than 50% probability. It doesn't depend on what you will use for this: spectrum analysis, technical analysis, foundation or coin flip - the result will be generally the same, very close to 50% at best. It is possible to find the points with more than 50%, 60% and 70% probability of the price reversal and work from them, but this is not a trend catching, however, one should not forget about the remaining 30% and the correction may not be big. Everyone is trying to catch the trend. In 50% of cases it is successful, in 50% it is not. Then why catch it? We should work on sideways movements, which take much more time than trends, and in both directions - it is unclear where the breakthrough will go anyway.
 
iModify:
All forecasting systems rarely give a probability of more than 50%. It does not depend on what you will use for it: spectrum analysis, technical analysis, foundation or flipping a coin - the result will be generally the same, very close to 50% at best. It is possible to find the points with more than 50%, 60% and 70% probability of the price reversal and work from them, but this is not a trend catching, however, one should not forget about the remaining 30% and the correction may not be big. Everyone is trying to catch the trend. In 50% of cases it is successful, in 50% it is not. Then why catch it? We should use sideways movements, which last for much longer than trends.
I always like to quote the phrase from a super toady's joke: "... you have been everywhere, you have tried everything, you know everything". It would be more correct, if I said something like: "... those systems I know (have dealt, worked, met, studied, etc. ....) seldom provide a probability...". In that case, it wouldn't leave an impression that you either seriously delude or, even worse, suffer from megalomania (omniscience) and kindly let us ignorant people have a tiny part of your knowledge. I apologize, nothing personal, but let's be more (the term "political correctness" used to be popular) "socially correct" or something like that, and communicate with our forum colleagues not "from Olympus height", but as near to equal.
 
SWA:
I always feel like quoting the phrase from the joke about the super sycophant: "... and you have been everywhere, and you have tried everything, and you know everything". It would be much more correct to say the following: "... those systems with which I am familiar (have dealt, worked, met, studied, etc.....) rarely give a probability...". In that case you wouldn't leave with an impression that you are either seriously deluded or, even worse, you are megalomaniac (omniscient) and kindly let us ignorant people have a tiny part of your knowledge. I beg your pardon, nothing personal, but let's be more (the term "politically correct" used to be popular) "socially correct" or something like that and communicate with our forum colleagues not "from Olympus height", but on the same level with them.
Dear Sir, do you have a complex? No one is stopping you from proving your point, not by words but by live examples.
 
SWA:
I always feel like quoting the phrase from the joke about the super sycophant: "... and you have been everywhere, and you have tried everything, and you know everything". It would be much more correct to say the following: "... those systems with which I am familiar (have dealt, worked, met, studied, etc.....) rarely give a probability...". If it were so, it wouldn't leave an impression that you either seriously delude or, even worse, suffer from megalomania and kindly let us ignorant people have a bit of your knowledge. I beg your pardon, nothing personal, but let us be more (the term "political correctness" used to be popular) "socially correct" or something like that and communicate with our forum colleagues not "from Olympus height", but on the same level with them.
So you come down to us).
 
223231:
There are regularities. One can make money, there are a lot of examples, it should be remembered as an axiom. The market is life, you have to live it, and not find a way to make a quick profit. In fact, there are many regularities, and there are so many that it would take a lifetime to enumerate them. The thing is that they are so unobvious and nontrivial that they are difficult for a normal person to understand. All these regularities come from the source, from the glass, but they will always be there. The market is very much like a traffic jam, in general it is chaotic traffic and if you drive in one lane (buy and hold) you will arrive sooner or later. But if you always have to change lanes, you either lose time or win. A traffic jam is chaos consisting of separate individuals. All lanes in general move the same way, but at any given moment, one moves faster than the others, and it depends on what's ahead, on the mass of circumstances. And at different points in time, these circumstances act differently on the series.
Speaking of non-trivial thinking: I have an acquaintance who has been successfully trading for several years, with his hands, on some kind of gut feeling. He earns good money just by trading. He is an addict, he is a total addict, and thanks to this he earns money, he sees what others do not see, because he thinks in the wrong way.
223231:
I applied as a pattern the statement that the market is SB. I did an experiment on history. I took the future average volatility and applied the drunken sailor formula to it. I predicted the movement for a day, week, month. The further the forecast is, the more accurate the results obtained. I used to make 15-minute forecasts. For instance, according to the forecast the price should pass 250 points in a month and indeed it passed these points with the accuracy of up to 5 points. But the problem is that it depends on the reference point. As a result, this coincided in 50% of cases. So it turns out that the market is only half the time of the sb. The rest half of it is controlled by something.
Then I applied spectrum analysis to predict each next candle. The results were amazing. I predicted the whole candle, i.e. ohlc, sometimes it coincided with each other up to 1 point, it was just unimaginable to see that when you see identical candle in real life. But after collecting more than 1000 data I understood that the candlesticks coincide 50% of the time. That is, the market really has this regularity, but it appears in 50% of cases. The same is true for the forecasting of an entire price series applying spectrum analysis. It is exactly 50%. In fact, it is a regularity as well, but it's not obvious as I wrote in the previous post. It can be applied.

50% is random, in which case it really doesn't matter if magic TA or Fourier decomposition is used.

I've heard of psychotropic drugs in the context of creative search, but you should be careful with them, otherwise you can do a lot of harm to yourself and no amount of money will help. Strong types of drugs can completely reorganise a person's motivational worldview and turn them into the likes of the rat in the pleasure-centre stimulation experiment (it stung the rfchag until it died). By the way, the film 'Insiders' mentions Volstric traders and coconut, which is risky.

 
For some reason, when we talk about forecasting, everyone means forecasting based on past price conditions. But does this kind of forecasting apply to all processes? Let's say you are driving through a city. You turn left or right, or go straight ahead at an intersection. How does your traveled path determine your future trajectory? The answer is obvious - it doesn't. If you now turn left, it is absolutely irrelevant whether you went straight ahead or left at another intersection. That's why motorists look straight ahead, not through the rear window of their car.

So on what basis do we make the assumption that the movement of the price is determined by its past movement, if even simpler phenomena are useless to analyse from this point of view?
 
C-4:
...
So on what basis do we make the assumption that the price movement is determined by its past movement ...?

Many things are built on theory and assumption - in trading it is the postulate of theanalysis - it comes from it.

However, mathematics is also based on the postulate that 2x2=4

1...5678910111213141516171819...35
New comment
Reason: