Market patterns - page 26
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
And as for "Trading Chaos", that's the psychologist's demagoguery. His "Alligator" is a fey! Shifting the already laggy mash-ups forward is genius! Especially as a result of 20 years of practice.
And as for "Trading Chaos", that's the psychologist's demagoguery. His "Alligator" is a fey! Shifting the already laggy mash-ups forward is genius! Especially as a result of 20 years of practice.
To be honest I also noticed that Alligator was incomprehensible to me when I started studying the Metatrader manual because of the shift of SMMA to the "future" by more than a half period, in theory the shift should go back to compensate the lag (visually) or at least leave 3 multi-period wands in place and orientate to their resonance or dissonance, depending on the objectives. But in the aligator, for some reason it shifts in the opposite direction.
On the whole Williams' book trilogy made an ambivalent impression too. At first I liked it, but then I began to notice that I like it not because of its structural or practical component, but simply as an artistic read, like books on self-improvement and positive thinking, in the style of Ron Hubbard.
And his other indicators are either no better than MACD or no more meaningful in terms of prediction than ZZ.
The fact that they were included into default MT set once again hints at you know what...
I wish they would have put in JMA and a lot of other really useful filters.
Shhhh... Don't make any noise, you'll scare off all the fish...
He's right to make noise. The more intimidated the fish are, the less the platform will be subject to the whims of you know who. After all, the goal is to move to regulated exchanges, and with B.B. indicators in the standard set it's pretty funny.
.............
Putting them in the default MT set once again hints at you-know-what...
Better put in ............
The right thing to do is to make noise. The more frightened the fish are, the less dependent the platform will be on the whims of you know who. Eventually the goal is to move to regulated exchanges, and with B.B. indicators in the standard set it's pretty hilarious.
Alex, it's far more cost-effective to fight your own stupidity than it is to fight local/global conspiracies. You cancheck it out.
You'll quickly find out it's just two sides of the same coin.
"Start with yourself", as all sorts of authors of said pop-books advise. And don't worry about the public, the social effect won't be long in coming.
"Break through yourself and many will break through beside you" (c) A couple of authors I know.
You can't just cut out psychologists, accountants and other decent professions from the market.
The only people left would be mathematicians and programmers, killing off all random processes.
That's hilarious.
Are you asking to be an "Anallas"? ))
Hilarious.
Are you asking to be an "Anallas"? ))
"I think so".
Flip through a couple or three pages from this post. How can they be left alone in the market? I mean, they'll straighten out all the SBs.
Alex, it's much more cost-effective to fight your own stupidity than it is to fight local/global conspiracies. You cancheck it out.
You'll quickly find out it's just two sides of the same coin.
"Start with yourself", as all sorts of authors of said pop-books advise. And don't worry about the public, the social effect won't be long in coming.
"Break through yourself and many will break through beside you" (c) A couple of authors I know.
And how does my stupidity manifest itself? Why are you being rude on nothing?
I supported the idea that Alligator is a bullshit indicator, as shifting into the future is a complete no-brainer, Clear and to the point.
And you started doing the Bill Williams style about fighting with yourself and that kind of crap.
I don't give a damn about the public, if the effectiveness of the software didn't depend on it.
It may be just a simple test for suckers, if no one objects to the section of indicators that are close to random, ok, then such suckers may be tricked with more stupid methods if you pay attention, mmm, ok, we will have to invent something more sophisticated.
What is most likely meant by that is that you should not trust indicators at all. They all show only the past and cannot look into the future, they only lag behind price.
As far as I understood from my brief study experience, professionals do not use indicators at all, but work with Price Action, i.e. pure price formations without any filtration.
Thus, non-professionals are allowed to argue about which indicators are better and which are worse. This is the destiny of beginners.
Where does my stupidity come in? Why are you being rude in an empty space?
Your stupidity, for example, is that you can easily explain any of your own misunderstandings with a "worldwide conspiracy".
It allows your stupidity to comfortably survive because it doesn't seem to exist. // You're right, aren't you? If it wasn't for the conspiracy, everything would be OK, right?
I won't go far to get an example, it's right there in your post.
I supported the idea that Alligator is a bullshit indicator, as shifting into the future is a complete no-brainer, Clear and to the point.
And you started doing the Bill Williams style about fighting with yourself and that kind of crap.
I don't give a damn about the public, if the effectiveness of the software didn't depend on it.
It may be just a simple test for suckers, if no one objects to the section of indicators that are close to random, ok, then they may use more stupid methods to get suckers if you pay attention, mmm, ok, I will have to invent something more sophisticated.
Your blatant stupidity (I explain using this concrete example) is that you assume that some section of indicators with "non-random" inputs is possible in the standard delivery.
In my universe this is impossible, for the appearance of such a section with necessity in a week would make it random. And the terminal (software) has nothing to do with it at all - those are the properties of markets. OBJECTIVE properties.
In your universe, the culprits are:
1) Software vendors
2) Brokers / market makers
3) Banks and their acolytes
4) Freemasons //how else could it be?
5)...
6, 7, 127) ... ... ...
.... But not your stupidity...
And since this is a fact for you (well justified) - you won't even question the effectiveness of "software" in your head, it's much quieter to criticize the software in the terminal. The public will always support, psychological defences against "fool in your own brains" are certainly a deeply public matter.
"I do not claim that there is no anti-Russian conspiracy, I only claim that almost the entire population of our great motherland participates in it" (c) V. Pelevin.
What was probably meant was not to trust the indicators at all.