Scold :) Interested to hear your opinion regarding... - page 4
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
Yes since 1999 I'm pretty sure myself that it's going to suck (almost 10 years and unchanging parameters, it's unreal...) what's the point of approaching the market with estimates from 10 years ago? :) Does anyone even use this in their trading? i.e. making a decision today, but based on what was 10 years ago? or 9? or even 7 or 8? :) just curious :)
ZS: I will of course post the results as they appear, in the process :)
testing over 2-3 years or 10 years
just to see how stable the system is and what trends it is good at
the perfect system must handle the market - there are probably no such systems
Of course - I myself write systems designed for large trends - and I totally agree with you!
Why would I need a successful system in 2001 if it fails in 2007 - 2008?
why sell the euro in 2007? it's more logical to buy it
why should i sell gold in 2006 - 2007, when we see growth during the long timeframe!!!
of course MTS has to take it into account!
Until I have proved the contrary, I will believe that it is quite possible to create a system where MM plays the leading role in its development into a robust one. I suspect that monotonically losing systems with mathematical expectation of a deal minus spread will not be profitable with MM. And it seems that the system without any analytical signals belongs to such.
But systems can be different. The balance at 0.1 may change very non-monotonically, and no one has strictly proven that nothing can be done with them. At the full testing interval m.o. of a trade can be close to zero (i.e. to the spread order value), but at separate parts of the testing interval m.o. can jump significantly in both directions from "zero". These are, in my opinion, quite promising areas for experiments with MM.
About MM's "no-means " ...
Sergey, could you develop your thought a bit, I highlighted the point of interest there in bold in the quote.
The idea should carry trading criteria.
(I think that fixed stop orders, generally speaking, may have a useful content, but first, on a random limited interval, and secondly, the benefit will still be less than the spread, i.e. eventually such a system will be a losing one; re-optimization - calculation of new settings - SL and TP - will only change the drawing of the losing curve, but not the result)
The question of trading criteria has already been solved once by two firemen: 'Automatic closing and opening of a position'.
When science gets to the point where it can recreate not just a copy of a person but an absolute copy, so that even the train of thought at one point in time is identical - except then I won't be able to work better than a robot, and why should I :) Let him work then. Until then...
Could you please elaborate on this thought?
Why in today's state of the art would a robot auto-trader work worse than a trader-trader-perspective? (assuming that the proprietary programmer neighbour has accurately programmed into the robot all the ideas of the speculative trader, without exception).
Until I have proved the contrary, I will believe that it is quite possible to create a system where MM plays the leading role in its development into a robust one. I suspect that monotonically losing systems with mathematical expectation of a deal minus spread will not be profitable with MM. And the system without ideas and analytical signals seems to be one of them.
But systems can be different. The balance on 0.1 may change very non-monotonically, and no one has strictly proven that nothing can be done with them. At the full testing interval m.o. of a trade can be close to zero (i.e. to the spread order value), but at separate parts of the testing interval m.o. can jump significantly in both directions from "zero". These are, in my opinion, quite promising areas for experiments with MM.
As soon as we find the method of detecting such parts and implement the specific trading method on them
As soon as a non-ideological trading system turns into an ideological one and its results depend on the quality of these ideas.
Can you expand on this thought?
Why, at today's level of technology, would a robot-autotrader work worse than a trader-trader-moderator? (assuming that the proprietary programmer neighbour has accurately programmed into the robot all the ideas of the speculative trader without exception).
Sergei ! I second the question !
I have talked about it many times
no one can answer and no one has answered yet
---
The "GENIAL" trader looks at the chart! he sees the indicators - he has some criteria - for example, candlesticks and so on
he makes decisions the same way he looks at the paternals looking at "his secret indicator signals"
"A GREAT TRADER" + "A GREAT PROGRAMMER" all rolled into one.
the main thing is that he described it to the programmer!
the programmer wrote what the trader decides on
---
After all, what a trader makes decisions by looking at charts - "speculatively mostly" ---
---
as for the difference in pattern images and so on
now there are quite good NEUROSET programs that are excellent at distinguishing "cat" from "dog" in a digital representation, of course
Bill Williams once said, until a computer can tell a cat from a dog, computer programs can't trade.
well, they already seem to be.
---
Maybe the answer lies in the fact
Is it that there are no such programmers?
or maybe there are no such traders?
or maybe the level of technology hasn't advanced that far?
or that the market is so volatile that a genius trader has time to rebuild - the old program is in the bin - and it already dictates new criteria to the programmer?
Sergey ! I second the question !
The "GENIAL" trader looks at the chart! he sees the indicators - he has some criteria - for example candlesticks and so on
he is making decisions Looking at the chart looking at "his secret indicators" - he has some criteria - candlesticks for example - and other - he is also a "thinker" - he is making decisions.
Maybe the answer is
that there are no such programmers?
or maybe there are no such traders?
or maybe the level of technology has not yet stepped up?
or that the market is so volatile that a brilliant trader has time to rebuild - the old program in the bin - and it already dictates a new criteria to the programmer?
The answer lies in the delusions of the vast majority of traders, in their educational level, insufficient for the task.
One looks at the sky and thinks that the Earth is flat and the stars are holes in the outer "blanket".
A man looks at a wheat field and, depending on his knowledge and delusions, thinks that for a good harvest it is necessary
- sacrifice a goat;
- to cover the field with pesticides;
- leave the field under pure fallow.
A person looks at the last candle or the whole price chart and depending on his knowledge and delusions thinks one should:
- open;
- close;
- do nothing;
- Carefully look at that indicator;
- look at that indicator;
- look at the combination of indicators;
The results of this "activity" usually show that there are more delusions than knowledge about the actual patterns of market development.
If the robot incorporates these misconceptions, the result will be corresponding.
The robot is the embodiment of our thoughts, knowledge and delusions. The robot is our creation. As we create it, so it will be.
Like, don't blame the mirror when you look in the mirror:)
--
Positive: learn, think, develop, create.
I have said before that forex is not at all about making money.
This is a good (real) means of getting rid of illusions; a means, a tool for personal development.
Segrei has, as always, stated the MESSAGE perfectly!
+100% for
Вы не могли бы развить эту мысль?
Why, with today's level of technology, would an auto-trading robot work worse than a mental trader? (Assuming that the proprietary programmer neighbour has accurately programmed into the robot all the ideas of the speculative trader, without exception).
Why? The answer is short, and you yourself have answered it many times before and not only in this thread, namely:
1. the future is in robot-trading robots
2. Forex is not for making money
Put those two points together and you get a depot drain, no other way around it.Yes, and I should add. The Expert Advisor and the robot-autotrader may be able to program all trader's ideas into the Expert Advisor without exception, but I cannot program the trader's reactions to the same "irritants", as it seems to me absolutely unrealistic.
The statistics is inexorable. 95% of traders fail. Is it possible to think that their reactions are correct?
That's why I say that it's not the robots, it's us.
If the system in your head is a drain, it won't work this way or that way.
If the system in your head is not plummeting, but profitable, then it is better to entrust it to a robot.
Separately, it should be noted that most of the natural human reactions are based on "normal" experience. For example, a trader involuntarily extends the "inertia property of physical objects" (the car does not slow down immediately, but gradually) to the market (usually unknowingly), believing that the market behaves in the "same way". But in fact it does not.
It takes a lot of experience to be able to mentally manage a trade, so much so that the trader begins to "feel" the current market mood. I have been sitting with my nose to the screen for more than 3 years, so I know that this feeling comes sooner or later. But to trade this way you must also stay in shape - you must spend at least 5 hours a day, 3 of which you just need to be "detached" from the outside world (so much so that you do not understand at first sight what you are being asked, and all you are asked is if you are having dinner:)
This is a very time-consuming and inefficient way. If you trade seriously, you don't even want that kind of money. This is the underlying essence of the phenomenon - in doing so, you involuntarily become different, you go out of your everyday life into this trading life, into these new, specific sensations and new experiences. And on the basis of this new experience you form a different perception of the world and different values.
I see the damage of this activity as a great (eventually) loss - you gradually, though partly, lose the experience of ordinary life - becoming more and more a part of the market, you perceive life as a market - music is not so interesting, day-night is not important, enjoyment of nature, smells - what does the market need this for?
---
The immediate future is with semi-automatics. Medium-term future - for automatons (well, one has to preserve a normal worldview in order to spend those earnings on anything normal:). The distant future - without forex.
In short: AutoGraf 4 - the best AutoGraf of all AutoGraf-ov !:))
(And if I don't win, I'll die under the fence, "a-no-no-no", "sirawno" life is interesting thing).