Probability, how do you turn it into a pattern ...? - page 8

New comment
 
2 Neveteran: My diagnosis: you made something working, but you can't figure out how it works yourself.
And you think that the theory of probability is playing along with you. The reason is easy to come up with - "because others are suckers".
Although the real reason for the strategy to work may be a hundred miles away (e.g. pattamushta pairs are interrelated, not independent at all).
I would suggest to post an EA (if available) or an exact description of the strategy. In order to thoroughly understand what the trick is.
But I won't, because I don't think it's realistic... You won't.
 
Neveteran >>:

"балансовая ликвидность просевших позиций"

30 пар заходят одновременно на селл, из них (усредненно) 50% уходят в профит (неважно на сколько), и столько же проседают (неважно на сколько), через 3 часа открываем терминал и хеджируем профитные позиции, получаем определенное соотношение выраженное, как постоянное положительное сальдо к изменяющемуся отрицательному. Соотнесем эти два значения между собой и произведем расчет возможной коррекции баланса отрицательных позиций относительно их количества и качества к стабильному (локированному) профиту, с учетом возможностей дэпо. Так я получаю исходные параметры для расчета дальнейших действий.

I'm sorry, I still don't get it. I don't think I ever will. Once again, forgive me for my impenetrable stupidity.

All I wanted was a formula/s, not a verbal explanation, which confused me even more...

So are we locking or hedging profitable positions?

 
MetaDriver >>:
2 Neveteran: .....
Но не буду, ибо считаю нереальным... Не будешь ты выкладывать.

By the way - I'd be glad to be wrong.

// If you don't want to post it on the forum, I can keep you company for a "debriefing" in private.

// I don't think you're capable of taking that offer seriously right now.

// But someday you'll get my diagnosis... Unless, of course, what you're writing here is a bullshit scam.

 
I think I understand. There is no system (analytical part), the entry is fanatical, on all 30 pairs, without stops and takeovers. Further, after 3 hours, we look what happened.
If we have acceptable profit, we close all positions at once: the result is achieved.
If not, we lock the profitable positions (in total we gain some paper profit, which is fixed at a constant level). And unprofitable ones we let to free float.
This is followed by cryptic words:
Let's relate these two values to each other and calculate a possible correction of the balance of negative positions in relation to their quantity and quality to a stable (locked) profit, taking into account the possibilities of the deposit. <br / translate="no">.
How this calculation is done - only the creator of the system knows.
The hope that there are a lot of losing positions, and sooner or later, the total loss will decrease to the level less than the fixed level of the paper profit.
P.S. The system must still be regarded as curious. I haven't seen anything like it before.
 
Mathemat >>:
...................
Надежда на то, что убыточных поз много, и рано или поздно общий убыток уменьшится до уровня менее зафиксированного уровня бумажного профита.
P.S. Систему все же следует признать любопытной. Ничего подобного не видел раньше.

Yes. Opening on 30 pairs at once looks, shall we say, refreshing.

But setting aside those 30 pairs (it's not about them - otherwise why would you explain to us that the Volga flows into the Caspian Sea), that leaves what? What have you never seen there?

Openings in both directions (essentially)? Loca? Over-sitting to the shit or closing on time? Averaging (ah, excuse me, compensating for losing positions given the depo's capabilities)?

What?

===

Pardon the author if I misunderstood something. Although, maybe the whole point is in the 2nd "cycle". Let's wait for clarification.

 
Yes, we are waiting.
Nevertheless, I certainly haven't seen a fresh one like this: it's a total aphrodisiac attitude towards TA.
And, of course, over-seeding.
And it's all very beautifully and colourfully described - probably using the latest NLP techniques.
 
Mm-hm. If you replace scientific terms with esoteric-extrasensory vocabulary, you can go straight to Mystic One - TV3. The techniques are the same. Juggling with terms, dark definitions of unknown things, etc. Obscurantism, in a word.
The author has miscalculated a little with the local audience - this style of narration is unambiguously associated with "parka" brains.
No, I understand that for boys and girls from zero-group (even if we suppose that it exists) it will definitely work. But this is a different contingent, after all.
===
What is interesting is that I agree 100% with the topicstarter about the reasons why he does not want to consider the market as a consequence of some reasonable forces.
I too have little interest in it, and the search for such "behind the scenes" reminds me (remotely!)) of the symptoms of paranoia at an early stage. Especially at low tf.
But here's what happens next... Yeah...
ok. We'll wait for the next series (cycle))).
Or should I say session? ))))))))
 
Neveteran >>:


Пока монета в воздухе, нет способа сказать с уверенностью, упадет ли она орлом вверх или вниз.

Then it will definitely be on the rib ))))
 
artikul >>:
Тогда точно на ребро встанет )))

That's not the point. The theory of probability as it is taught and presented in textbooks is a historical one, as it has its origins in casinos, not in the fundamental laws of nature. The usual order of presentation: definition of probability (axiomatic), its properties, and then all subsequent laws.
In fact, the laws of nature, such as the law of large numbers, are fundamental. If exactly it is accepted as a starting point of the theory - not as some axiom, but as an objective reality (as in all "normal" sciences), then the very definition of probability and all its properties follow from it quite naturally. In this case the notion of probability is practically identical (with exact functional dependence) to the notion of information, and this is generally speaking what everything - matter, energy and field - "consists" of. This is why TV is not really deeply understood by most of those who study it - it is simply not yet fully constructed logically.

 
Neveteran писал(а) >> Probability, how do you turn it into a pattern...?

It seems to me that the question is not put correctly. It should be a pattern, how do you calculate the probability of that pattern appearing?

123456789101112131415...93
New comment
Reason: