a trading strategy based on Elliott Wave Theory - page 252
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
It is clear now. In this case it is really not worth bothering with. I thought you were interested in refining the boundary prediction, but it turns out to be the other way around.
In fact it is the other way round. Really, think about it yourself, if High and Low are completely random, then how can the range be non-random ? "The bigger point" of it, from my point of view, is that it sets the spread of the crowd's opinion about the price at a given time. And High and Low are the points of change of dominant opinion. As you know two points on the axis carry more information than the distance between them.
and I'm interested in something else today: http://www.berdyansk.net/club/mist/nom_1/myst_m.htm
:)
appreciated your humour :0)
Seriously speaking Pastuhov's algorithm shows real-time profitability just above brokerage commissions and below the profitability of my autoregressive strategy. I am currently trying to understand the existing potential of H-builds and outline ways to increase strategy's profitability.
Neutron congratulations !!! :))) What's the name?
My daughter's name is Diana. Diana Sergeyevna will be, I think, sounds beautiful.
My friend's first daughter is also Diana. It has only now come to light where (perhaps) that name comes from.
To all participants and readers of this branch congratulations on the Jubilee!!! I hope it will be as informative in the future and keep quite high and constructive level of communication between branch participants, which can be one of the factors to attract other participants who will be also interested in sharing their ideas based on basic scientific knowledge :o))) Good luck with your research, everyone!
Right! But perhaps, we should start from Sergey's birth... otherwise, there wouldn't be such a wonderful person as Diana in the world :o))))
to Yurixx
Now it is clear. In this case it is really not worth bothering with. I thought you were interested in clarifying the boundary prediction, but it turns out it is the other way round.
In my humble opinion, it's impossible to plan accurately for forex on small samples.
Actually it's the other way round. Really, think about it yourself, if High and Low are completely random, how can the range be non-random ? "The greater meaning" of it, in my view, is that it sets the spread of the crowd's opinion on price at a given point in time. And High and Low are the points of change of dominant opinion. As you know, two points on the axis carry more information than the distance between them.
Yurix, I followed the same "logically correct" path at the very beginning. Let me try to explain (or rather, to remind you what you already know without me) - the input data density is approximately 3-15 ticks per minute, and you want to precisely plan Hegh or Low, ie values that when and how happens during the minute, hour, day... with such an uneven flow of such a process like forex?
I gave the notion of "more meaning" just in terms of predictability. And these points - H and L in my humble view, taken separately from each other have absolutely nothing. If you perform a simple experiment and draw a horizontal line from (H+L)/2 to the next bar, you will get into the range of the next bar VERY often (the more often, the bigger is the timeframe), what can't be said about H and L separately. Let me write myself an obvious nonsense: these numbers (H and L) are different, but together they are one, you just have to see it.
One day, while having a drink with someone I'm interested in, we got into a conversation about Chaos. I was discussing it (Chaos) in the "known tradition", and suddenly this man interrupted me with, "Sergey, there is no Chaos, Chaos is a wrong perspective, and all you need to do is to expand consciousness (we were expanding it with a Hoegaarden that evening) and find that right perspective"...digression.
(H+L)/2 is not a self-affirmation, after all, it's just the beginning of a dialogue. :о) Show that H and L separately will give a better and more accurate prediction.
PS: A bit of flaming, a friend sent a congratulations:
Guns firing, machine guns firing.
Rockets and bombs fly,
And in the sky, brave pilots
And in the sky the brave pilots shoot each other down.
Flames are blazing, mines are exploding,
There are mountains of corpses everywhere,
And tanks in a deadly wedge
crush the peaceful fences.
And the commander, with his eraser,
bent over his war map.
That's what I call a holiday,
Not like bloody March 8th!