Non-fitting system - main features - page 10
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
Tired. What's this about?
I understand the thought process is a time-consuming one, get some rest.
Sorry to interfere with the "grown ups" playing the beautiful abstruse game....
I understand the thought process is time consuming, give it a rest.
Sorry to interfere with the "grown ups" playing nicely with the nerdy stuff....
You misunderstand, there is and can be no excuse for that. CG.
I see. No further questions. I haven't received a single answer. The doubts that plagued you have transformed into the belief that you simply don't know what you're talking about. You can't answer an elementary question and are only twisting and trying to hurt. Ridiculous and pathetic. There really is no point in talking like that.
===
For reference: "Technical analysis is predicting future price changes based on analysis of past price changes." It's from Wiki. The methods are any. The main thing is the subject of analysis. Some people do not like the term "forecast". OK. Let it be an expectation - when we open an order, we expect (forecast) that the price will meet the logic of its opening in the future. It may be loss or profit. Or an expiration time.
I think you are an idiot. I'm sorry, of course, but that's not even an insult. It's just a fact.===
Four years ago I started studying TA with the book "Technical Analysis. Schwager's "The Complete Course", but you don't seem to have got beyond the wiki. I will read it for you from the wiki itself (a very correct paragraph, and I will even highlight it as a warning, not for you - it's useless):
The technical analysis of price charts in the past does not allow us to guess the "reversal points" of prices in the future, but when prices develop in an already known direction, the analysis gives a simple "buy and hold" strategy ..... For example, Warren Buffett says the following: "I realized that technical analysis doesn't work when I turned the price charts "upside down" and got the same result."
And if you stop bickering and finally engage your brain, and at least try to explain yourself, what you have there and on what grounds, I will not be sorry for the time wasted on you dear man.
I apologise to the topic starter for the off-topic.
I wrote in my first post what system is not fitting, unlike you dear :o)
>> now it's grasn with Svinozavr, and now it's us :)
))) What kind of relations are there? God forbid.
4 years ago I started studying TA with the book "Technical Analysis. Schwager's Complete Course, but you didn't seem to get any further than the wiki. I will read it for you from the same wiki (very right paragraph, and I'll even highlight it as a warning, not for you - it's useless):
Technical analysis of price charts in the past does not allow us to guess future price "reversal points", and when prices develop in an already known direction, thechanalysis provides a simple "buy and hold" strategy .... For example, Warren Buffett says the following: "I knew technical analysis didn't work when I turned the price charts upside down and got the same result."
And if you stop bickering and finally engage your brain, and at least try to explain yourself, what you have there and on what grounds, I will not be sorry for the time wasted on you dear man.
I wrote in my first post what system is not adjustable, unlike you, dear :o)
))) Leave me alone.
))) >> leave me alone.
>> with pleasure.
4 years ago I started studying TA with the book "Technical Analysis. Schwager's Complete Course, but you didn't seem to get any further than the wiki. I will read it for you from the same wiki (very right paragraph, and I'll even highlight it as a warning, not for you - it's useless):
The technical analysis of price charts in the past does not allow to guess the "reversal points" of prices in the future, and when prices move in an already known direction, the analysis gives a simple "buy and hold" strategy ..... For example, Warren Buffett says the following: "I knew technical analysis didn't work when I turned the price charts upside down and got the same result."
And if you stop bickering and finally engage your brain, and at least try to explain yourself, what you have there and on what grounds, I will not be sorry for the time wasted on you dear man.
I wrote in my first post what system is not adjustable, unlike you, dear :o)
Since when did Buffett become a TA expert?
And who says it's TA's job to look for future pivot points?
And the wiki, too...
The fact that there are more and more links to the same wiki on the forum lately shows that one should start with the definitions of the notions used in the dispute,
but it seems even at this stage there will be no common denominator, everyone is angry lately ...
))) What kind of relationship is that? God forbid.
Once again the disagreements in terminology were fought over, and in vain, imho. (
For me, for example, as for Peter (Svinozavr) there are:
1. FA which has nothing to do with the price neither in the past nor in the future (it is any kind of news, their expectations and actually accomplished),
2. TA - ALL ways to get predictions/signals based on a stream of quotes and their history.
But if someone believes that, for example, wave or candlestick analysis does not belong to TA, then it is their sacred right to argue about it,
>> I do not see any reason to argue and moreover to sow enmity.
Grasn and Svinozavr are having an argument, and now we are going to have one :)
[1] Let it be according to you..... is a property of the OS system, and its coefficient has nothing to do with the system..... does it change anything?
[2] Familiar, and not from Vicpedia. I am so familiar that I haven't seen and felt any really working system without OS (only about biosystems, like Earth, don't need to recall) - have you seen? - enlighten me. PIC, OOS are special cases, I did not mention..... but simply did not consider it necessary. Here the contingent is such that he does not need to spell out anything.
[3] The property of "stability" does not appear out of nowhere, but is achieved by competent design, construction and tuning on site. Stability of any system is not constant, eternal (if we are talking about real systems, not theorizing).
Now it's your turn to get into the word "tuning".
I apologized in advance, so that my remarks were not perceived as a wish to annoy...
But it remains from my student days - my physics teacher always demanded "accuracy of formulations", when I decided to disagree with him in my youth.
I do not think that we have reasons for clarification of relations, we can simply come to a common vision, or not to come, thus nobody, to anybody, does not owe anything - purely "academic" interest, for the sake of knowledge of truth (or at least approximation to knowledge).
... "I have never seen and felt a system without an operating system that actually works" ..... Let me ask you, how many of the systems you have probed meet the criterion of "non-adaptive, working TC"? In this case, statistics about the number of non-working systems is not important. The important statistic is: how many of the systems you have seen and felt have OS?
In this case, I do not insist on the criteria I formulated earlier, if one criterion is met - the system works in real life and provides a stable positive result.
I got into the word 'customisation' - 'fitting', 'machining with a file before assembly', and in general changing the rules of the game as you play.
Since when did Buffett become a TA expert?
And the wiki, too...
And the very fact that lately there are more and more references on the forum to the same wiki, says that we should start with definitions of the concepts used in the dispute,
but it seems even at this stage a common denominator won't be found, everybody's been angry lately...
Did you only read my post?