a trading strategy based on Elliott Wave Theory - page 145
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
Don't be rude, my dear friend, you are not the only one who is entitled to his opinion.
Once again, I hope we won't have to wait 40 days...
Remember, no one will ever prove anything to you.
There is no point.
Sincerely,
Alexey.
If you have read a few of the above posts and decided not to study Elliott Waves, then
you did the right thing. Why complicate your life, why bother, it's better to follow the
path of least resistance - it's the easiest way, isn't it? Isn't it?
Has your attempt failed once again? I wonder how many attempts you had?
It's your right to go either way...
"And each went his own way and the train went its own way."
Begun, good luck on your way :-)
Sincerely,
Alexey.
It's a pity that the discussion has taken a somewhat "unscientific" turn. By the way, I have a friend who is a professional trader, plays big time, but on the stock market. He is a big fan of Elliott Waves. He taught me a lot. But he never uses Eliot waves as an independent forecasting tool and strongly warns against it. Always looks at a few additional tools and the GREATEST - news and fundamentals. And only after that he continues with "the wave", in the sense of getting the pattern (and there is nothing special about this word, it is used not only in hypnosis works). I have to hand it to him - he's right almost always.
PS: But he is a bit of a pessimist. I`ve came to know several years ago that I`m going to remember my past and start playing only Forex - he begged me and dissuaded me (better to play with stock or gold...), said that no one wins on it, and the lucky 5% will definitely lose, but next year or year after that. :о)
Welcome back.
I do not remember that the Wave Theory was previously discussed as a panacea for "all ills" and that it gives 100% results in forecasting. Of course it is not entirely true, and your friend is absolutely right about that. I use a whole set of additional tools to make better predictions. If the situation is not clear, you should refrain from trading. Besides, your capital will be safer and your nerves will not get nervous.
Sincerely,
My respect Alexey.
Exactly. That's what I wanted when I presented my obviously superficial view of EWT.
I wanted to hear from supporters and experts what is significant in it (except for the 5-3 structure, of course). The most interesting, constructive, workable ideas, which no doubt any trader can understand. Sultanas, so to speak. However, as it turns out, supporters and experts can either lay out the whole thing (which makes no sense, since there are books), or nothing. Alas. :(
And that's a pity. If I had heard something interesting I might have become a supporter myself. Or at least I would have tried to get to know it better.
By the way, to avoid misunderstandings.
I can expound the main ideas of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 3-4 paragraphs so that even a non-specialist and non-physicist can understand them. Or, for example, the ideas of the Special Theory of Relativity. Or the ideas of quantum mechanics. But I can hardly expound any of these theories in their entirety. I mean, you don't have to study the whole theory to understand the ideas. But one who has studied the theory is obliged to understand the ideas as well.
...
If you have read a few of the above posts and decided not to study Elliott Waves, then
You did the right thing. Why complicate your life, why strain yourself, it's better to take the path of
the path of least resistance - that's the easiest way, isn't it? Isn't it?
...
I chose the path of research and so on and so forth. I don't use chewed up useless chewing gum.
Looks like there are thinkers and there are nerds :)
I propose to stop unnecessary polemics. The market will judge.
Exactly. That's what I wanted when I presented my apparently superficial view of EWT.
I wanted to hear from supporters and experts what is the most important thing about it (except the 5-3 structure, of course). The most interesting, constructive, workable ideas, which no doubt any trader can understand. Sultanas, so to speak. However, as it turns out, supporters and experts can either lay out the whole thing (which makes no sense, since there are books), or nothing. Alas. :(
Too bad. If I had heard something interesting, I might have become a supporter myself. Or at least I would have tried to look more deeply into the matter.
By the way, to avoid misunderstanding.
I can expound the main ideas of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity in 3-4 paragraphs so that even a non-specialist and non-physicist can understand them. Or, for example, the ideas of the Special Theory of Relativity. Or the ideas of quantum mechanics. But I can hardly expound any of these theories in their entirety. I mean, you don't have to study the whole theory to understand the ideas. But he who has studied the theory must also understand the ideas.
Yuri, I have already written above the thread that I, for example, cautioned against using EWT to make predictions - I can only emphasize: the degree of uncertainty in the current approximation. There may be (not always, but very often) more than one partitioning at the same point in time, including leading to different projections - i.e. diametrically opposite views of developments, counting from the current trajectory point. And there is no criterion (there is not even a consideration in this theory how to create such a criterion) to evaluate the degree of similarity or difference of the approximations. And, you are absolutely right, hence the need for such confusing rules and corrections to them. Josephson (creator of AGET-Advanced Gunn-Elliott Trader) pointed it out and using Paretto's empirical 80x20 rule (that is in the sense that 80% of results are achieved with 20% effort or any other similar interpretation :)) ) with a slight adjustment, he identified about 40% of unambiguously interpreted rules and added a checking mechanism: it turned out to yield more than 60% of possible returns. And, although AGET's markup is not often the same as what EWT fans hand draw, AGET's profits\loss ratio is just as good. This is now included in the package from e-signal. There's more info on the spider and AGET itself under Omega - working build 165.
So, IMHO: any unambiguous quantitative criteria are preferable - they can be objectively evaluated statistically.
There is also a way to trade on patterns Pesavento, Gartley - it also gives unambiguous way to interpret the current situation. It is based on Fibo ratios and qualitatively fractal (in the sense of similarity and repeatability of structures on different prices) approaches to the market. So, IMHO - it is more preferable. The literature is also available on the spider.
I will pay attention that solandr turned out to be right: using second order approximation the ratio of profitable and loss-making trades can be significantly improved (for me at linear approximation about 70-75% of profitable trades in the same period). Even higher approximation degree (orders from 3 to 20 inclusive) leads to higher uncertainty (at least for the strategy I have built :) ) - And so, it is quite possible to stop at the second order of approximation. I ran it through history and noticed that criteria of extremality, that I used and without which linear regression gives quite modest results when approximated by polynomials of second order (it's not always parabola, strictly speaking, but very similar) for the most part satisfy automatically (or nearly so, which is not essential, but it's essential that calculation takes much less time). I also want to compare with approximation by Chebyshev polynomials - at degrees of approximation higher than 1 they should have less error.
Sincerely, Vladislav.
Good luck and good luck with the trends.