It's impossible to make money on Forox!!! - page 11
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
Well, I'm sort of not the author of this thread. I just understand, as it seemed to me, what the author meant in his starting topic, the objectives are just not quite clear: support, as if no money would be made, maybe a rebuttal? :)
I was just partly expressing your point of view that I agree that the classical approach has long since exhausted itself and will not bring the desired result. And on the contrary, as I wrote above, you can make money without knowing any formula:
It never worked in the way it is used now. The matter is that in those times there was no possibility to check one or another method in tester/optimizer, and trader used his method when he considered it reasonable. And this "relevance" was not regulated, and the art of the trader was in this very "market sense".
It's all easy to check: take any Expert Advisor, based on "outdated" TA indicators, load the "then" history and run in the tester. You won't find any fundamental differences from the test on modern data.
===
So. don't accuse the "grandfather" of infirmity. It all depends on the "grandmother".)))
It never really worked in the way it is used now. The point is that in those days, there was no possibility to run in the tester/optimizer this or that method, and a trader applied his method when he considered it appropriate. And this "relevance" was not regulated, and the art of the trader was in this very "market sense".
It's all easy to check: take any Expert Advisor, based on "outdated" TA indicators, load the "then" history and run in the tester. You will not find any fundamental differences from the test on modern data.
===
So. don't accuse the "grandfather" of infirmity. It all depends on the "grandma")))
I didn't accuse anyone of anything. Moreover, I have never said that you can use any indicator and use it to trade consistently in the black. And I don't think that all classic indicators are absolutely useless,
don't get too excited. I just want to say that they have been more useful in analysis in the past. These are the words of people who have been in the market longer than me and we are not speaking about the Stone Age,
we're talking about the foreseeable past. No matter how you look at it, the market is improving because of the modern computing power available to many.
I did not accuse anyone of anything. Moreover, I never said that you can use any indicator and use it to trade profitably. And I don't think all classic indicators are absolutely useless either,
don't get too excited. I just want to say that they have been more useful in analysis in the past. These are the words of people who have been in the market longer than me and we are not speaking about the Stone Age,
))) Where do you see the hotness? The avatar or the nickname?
And the benefit... I must have been quiet for the test on "those" data. I should have been "hot". You make me look like a nerd with your inattention: take the benefit - test it. You can give the same advice to the "long-timers". Your humble servant is not "young" in that sense either.
we're talking about the foreseeable past. No matter how you look at it, but the market is increasing its efficiency because of the fact that many people have access to modern computing power.
And what has changed from that? Has the SMA suddenly ceased to be the sum of the elements of a series, referred to its length? Or has the "dandruff" figure stopped showing the expiry of the trend? )))
Once again. There is a local context where it all works. And there's where it doesn't. A bad MTS and a bot can't tell the difference, but a good trader can feel it. I felt it then and I feel it now. Methods have nothing to do with it.
Of course, thought does not stand still and new methods of analysis are being invented, but it by no means means means that the old ones have ceased to show what they once showed.
Svinozavr писал(а) >>
Or the "dandruff" figure
and who's that?
:)))
Probably Head and Shoulders. >> Shampoo. :)
))) >> Mm-hmm.
ah...
cocksucker... Ugh, head and shoulders...
It's impossible to make money on forox!!!
nonsense...
ah...
cocksucker... Ugh, head and shoulders...
It's impossible to make money on forox!!!
silly...
))) Don't tell me, don't tell me... Somebody's got it going on! (not earn)))))))))))))))
))) Don't tell me, don't tell me... Somebody's got it going on! (not make money)))))))))))))))
and I even know that percentage...
;)))
))) Where do you see hotness? Avatar or nickname?
What's the use... I must have been speaking quietly for the test on "those" data. I should have been "hot". You make me look like a nerd with your inattention: take the benefit - test it. You can give the same advice to the "long-timers". Your humble servant is not "young" in that sense either.
And what has changed from that? Has the SMA suddenly ceased to be the sum of the elements of the series, referred to its length? Or has the "dandruff" figure stopped showing the expiry of the trend? )))
Once again. There is a local context where it all works. And there's where it doesn't. A bad MTS and a bot can't tell the difference, but a good trader can feel it. I felt it then and I feel it now. Methods have nothing to do with it.
Of course, the thought does not stand still and new methods of analysis are being developed, but it by no means means means that old ones have ceased to show what they used to show.
Heh. That's a strange way to talk. It seems that your job is to look for something to pick on... The phrase "you shouldn't get angry" was written figuratively, and it had nothing to do with your temperament. As for the point: if you are not aware of something, it does not mean that it does not exist. And I find it a thankless task to try to interpret a story that is that deep and, moreover, to prove something to someone.