Don't tell me then that TA doesn't work - page 2
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
What does TA have to do with optimisation? TA, as far as I know, refers to the application of detected patterns/models in different variations, i.e. what the process itself generates. What does this have to do with optimisation? Optimisation is about fitting.
Optimization is pattern detection.
To check for a fit or pattern, after optimisation one tests on a section of history adjacent to the one being optimised - OOS.
Gold Dust - more than single - multiple optimization and partial elimination of fitting, by screening out obviously false signals.
Tell me, how many people here make money by applying optimisation?
I don't know, I'm not a tax inspector and no one reports their income to me.
And what is the principal difference between "application of detected patterns/models in different variations, i.e. what the process itself generates" and "optimization"? In other words, how is optimization not "application of detected patterns/models in different variations"?
The key words are "Generates the process itself". For example: take a triplet (1-2-3) break of the 2nd wave - entry, stop above/below the base of the 2nd wave (depending on the direction) - it is a signal. I.e. the process itself generates a signal and is a signal flow through some prism (like in the example). When optimizing on a selected area on the chart, the characteristics (input parameters) of the signal generated by the process start fitting. For example: In the same triplet on the selected section of the chart there are 10 profitable signals and 10 unprofitable signals in total 0! But in 10 profitable signals the price did not pass more than 50% of the distance to the stop. The optimizer saw that and optimized it, which resulted in a profit.
Yes, we can say that these new input parameters can be accepted as a new prism and this signal is also generated by the process, but this signal is fitted to a specific area. That's the difference. I.e. TA does not imply fitting: take an instrument (let's say - a triplet) open a graph and off you go.
In other words it is possible to take any two muvings of any liquid instrument and make profit - it is a matter of time literally, because any TA in its pure form will give drawdowns.
Almost every month there is a thread on this forum where another whiner, goondos or luderast says that technical analysis is a self-deception.
You started with a very aggressive and insulting attitude. Maybe there are good people among those who say so? Otherwise it turns out that Warren Buffett is a goondo, and the former chairman of the Fed is a whiner, and some of the traders in Schwager's works are fluderasts.....
If I am not mistaken in the hrenfx test results, the 9-month trading yield was around 3.4%? And if someone puts that amount into a AAA bank and gets a return of, say, 5% over the same period? Then he can say that you are a goondos and TA is self-deception?
Optimisation - detection of patterns.
To check for a fit or pattern, after optimisation test on a stretch of history adjacent to the one being optimised - OOS.
Gold Dust - more than one - multiple optimization and partial elimination of fitting, by screening out obviously false signals.
I don't know, I'm not a tax inspector and no one reports income to me.
Personally, this idea is very interesting, but answer the question why not 3-4-5 plots, but only 2?
Wearing two condoms is certainly more reliable, but the point of action is the same.
Reshetov:
.....
I don't know, I'm not a tax inspector and no one reports income to me.
I asked everyone. I just wondered because I have always thought that optimization is stupid. Maybe I am wrong, that is why I am asking.
And who doesn't drink! Drink!... But they do...
It's not that TA doesn't work - it does. The problem is in my brain: Why isn't the calculator paying me back?
I don't even want to start...
Almost every month there is a thread on this forum in which another whiner, gundos or luder states that technical analysis is self-defeating.
To refute this hypothesis once and for all....
As a result, it turns out that the reasons why TA "doesn't work" are:
2. Various left methods and strategies, which are not suitable for trading, but were created for suckers.
That is, in skilful hands TA works and very successfully.
So it's not all TA works? Or all of it? Or only one method? And which methods are true and which are created for suckers?
Yuri, confess what the catch is???? The tests are quite impressive. Why robust theme and free as a gift to all....Not enough room in the flat for money????
There's nowhere to dump a dump truck full of gingerbread...
I, for example, have the utmost respect for Reshetov's willingness to share his designs. Nothing personal, I do not use them in my work, but creativity should always be welcomed.
And if he has a catch, it may be in technical terms, rather than a desire to rip someone off.