The second sacred cow: "Grow profits, cut losses" - page 22

New comment
 
Tantrik:

100 quid and he'll tell you.
Guessing ))
 

In what cases (and in what combinations of SL and TP) is the probability of SL equal to 1 (excluding degenerate cases)?

The same question about TP.

PS Oh, and one more thing. Regardless of whether buy or sell, the probability of SL(TP) execution is equal to 1.

 
DDFCash:
Bravo. Exactly. Are you not interested in boxing? "Double", "triple", "sideways", "leaving", "straight"... "by themselves" is a technique practiced to automatism. Practiced on the level of reflexes, but at what moment to apply each "of"... - is skill. Practically TK "in the studio".


This is the example I was thinking of giving, but it's already a lot of letters))). In a level analogy, it's silly to discuss whether a hook to the right works, or which punch is better.

But TC would not compare it to reflexes, as they are unformalised, but to pre-designed punching combinations. Certain practiced type combinations will be effective against poorly trained opponents (low-liquid markets). Or, a certain combination is adjusted to the opponent, taking into account his technical errors/disadvantages (TC for certain markets) for a particular fight (a certain range of TC). There are no graded combinations either (as well as TC) - either opponents will realise their shortcomings and develop adequate defence, or they will leave the box or go to a lower level. :)

 
It's options!
 

. . .

Tuck. 60% chance. Or even 70. Not 50 or lower. In this case we have the possibility of a "stable" profit if we spread the risk, paralleling it to simultaneous flows, where losses do not take "concentrated" hits.

 
P.S. Trend-following systems, to which the rule from the thread title applies, can be compared to punchers, who always have a chance))) They miss a lot of small punches in the hope of landing one knockout punch, or close to it :)
 
Avals:
P.S. Trend-following systems, to which the rule from the thread title applies, can be compared to punchers, who always have a chance))) They miss a lot of small punches in the hope of getting one puncher, or close to it :)
nice parallel
 
26994:

. . .

Tuck. 60% chance. Or even 70. Not 50 or lower. In this case we have the possibility of a "stable" profit if we spread the risk, paralleling it to simultaneous flows, where losses do not take "concentrated" hits.

Diagonal...
 
Avals:
P.S. Trend-following systems, to which the rule from the thread title applies, can be compared to punchers, who always have a chance))) They miss a lot of small punches in the hope of landing one knockout punch, or close to it :)
Lots of small punches can be very draining. And if you don't "exhaust", you get a "no score" "on points", which would also be a defeat. The main analogy with boxing was to make the minds understand a simple idea - "you can't go far on one element". For those who want to find "one killing combination", these are temporary people in the trading field. Tough, hard work, with sweat and blood waiting for anyone who wants to succeed in any field. Only a broad set of combinations opens up horizons for learning. But what matters is the combination of elements. Movement. Movement is life. "Grow"... "Cut"... And "in what way"? Without studying the object of cultivation, it is impossible to "cultivate".
 
DDFCash:
A lot of small punches can be very draining.....
Prefer to get knocked out straight away and lie on the floor unexhausted?
1...15161718192021222324252627
New comment