Redrawing indicators. - page 5
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
Actually, I read somewhere that this kind of redrawing turkeys are very often used by waveforms, as an indication that helps to distinguish waves more clearly.
The PI has its own quantization - that's all. If you want to know how the indicator behaved when the right part of the history was not there yet - no problem, fix it in a separate buffer.
It's all a far-fetched problem. And I don't understand what the hell is being made of it.
Вообще, читал где-то, что такого плана перерисовывающие индюки очень часто используют волновики, в качестве индюка, который хорошо помогает более наглядно выделять волны.
и
AlGor wrote (a) >> In general, I completely agree with Peter - redrawing indices should be perceived as a semi-finished product, "underindicator", a joy for the eye, a delight for the soul :)). But if we fix values, overdrawing with "joy" disappears but we obtain a tool that is quite useful for work.
This is all subjective perception and has almost nothing to do with ATC.
I have a purely practical interest in terms of ATS creation, and I perfectly understand what the "charms" of PI are. I have already written about how to avoid these "charms", but it is not suitable for all PIs.
If the values are fixed, there are many problems. The first one is gaps formation in the places where the indicator is overripe, especially if there was a sharp change of trend. The second one is how to test in the tester, when the indicator has already been calculated and there are no re-routes. It requires writing a new tester especially for re-routing indices. There are a lot of other problems I do not remember anymore. Well, all in all, not everything is as simple as it seems. )))
How about the question at the end of page 3?
So, we have Hodrick-Prescott, a gooseneck, and, if Mathemat can find it, a marvellous dasher. Any other suggestions?
Shit. Please understand that the PI is formed on the 0th indicator frame, which in general is not the same as the timeframe (bar) and is set by the internal logic of the indicator.
The PI has its own quantization - that's all. If you want to know how the indicator behaved when the right part of the history was not there yet - no problem, fix it in a separate buffer.
It's all a far-fetched problem. And I don't understand what the hell is being made of it.
Sitting at your computer and thinking that you are discovering a new America, you should look around and think about the fact that we live in the 21st century, a lot of things have been discovered, tested and studied, especially in such an area as Forex, where "only a lazy man" Not dreaming to make money and maybe this America was discovered long time ago, we just landed on the shore, which was abandoned by everybody long time ago, due to the lack of fresh water, fertile land and opportunity to earn and live there, we just don't know about it. Nowadays, having information is the most important thing, so as not to step on a rake for the 98th time, thinking that you are discovering America.))))Так, имеем пока Ходрика-Прескота, гусиницу, и, если Mathemat найдет, чудесную машку. Ещё есть какие предложения?
Try to get in touch with him - maybe he'll give it back.
P.S. Note how he saw the impulse downwards in the centre: it had not yet started - and the indicator went down already. A dream!
If you fix the values, a lot of problems arise. The first one is the formation of gaps, in places where the indicator is re-routed, especially if there has been a sharp change in the trend. The second one is how to test in the tester, when the indicator has already been calculated and there are no re-routes. It requires writing a new tester especially for re-routing indices. There are a lot of other problems I do not remember anymore. Well, all in all, not everything is as simple as it seems. )))
Leo - they behave the same in the tester as they do in reality. :)
No problem. As they say - "it's our business to offer, yours to refuse" )))) Rerolling is the opium for the people! )))
No problem. As they say - "it's our business to offer, yours to refuse" ))))
So one problem removed. :))