Is any prediction doomed? - page 6
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
Yes
A lot of experienced people who are involved in the finnancial markets. I am not prepared to give you a complete list right now.
Yes
The word "someone" is not appropriate here)))) Of course, you can question anything - it just won't do any good.
Here's the thing. If everything was questioned, then science would not get off the ground, because there are a million ways of making a stone hammer and if every time you question the way of making this hammer, mankind would still be searching for the best way to make a stone hammer.
Applied to the financial markets - 10 years ago, traders were charting currency movements on a millimetre chart, if you know what that is, then if you questioned better ways of transmitting information every time, you and I would still be charting on millimetre charts.
Applied to colour. If you are unaware that this fact has long been researched and abandoned, that does not mean it is not true.
Provide an incomplete list.
.
The hammer example has nothing to do with science. You don't seem to be familiar with the role of doubt in generating new ideas...
.
"Subtle" quips about knowledge of millimetrics in no way improve the way information is communicated.
.
"researched and abandoned" by a certain section of researchers --- but fortunately this is not a sufficient argument and guide to action, or rather inaction, for everyone else.
Here's the thing --- I'm not prepared to bat for the truth. That is not my prerogative.
Once upon a time, the science of how to get a hammer right was also a science )))
Everything is good in moderation. It also applies to doubt ))))
It's not a quibble. There was a time when charts were drawn and stochastics were calculated on a "calculator". Now, advanced people do time compression on the price chart, instead of trying to predict the colour of the next candle. This is a bygone era - like with the hammer example.
Of course, nowadays you can also make a hammer yourself. There is no point in buying one from a shop, made with modern technology rather than by hand - ))))
Here's the thing - I'm not ready to fight for the truth. It's not my prerogative.
Once upon a time, the science of how to get a hammer right was also a science )))
Everything is good in moderation. This also applies to doubt ))))
It's not a quibble. There was a time when charts were drawn and stochastics were calculated on a "calculator". Nowadays, advanced people do time compression on the price chart, instead of trying to predict the colour of the next candle. This is a bygone era - like with the hammer example.
Of course, nowadays you can also make a hammer yourself. There is no point in buying one from a shop, made with modern technology rather than by hand - ))))
I agree.
Just what was I going to say? What I meant to say was that no one would think of inventing a new way of making a hammer, because in their opinion this way of making a hammer is not quite right. It's like reinventing the bicycle.
As for predicting the colour of the next candle, you can logically conclude that this idea was the first at the beginning of price charts in the form of candlesticks. And only the "lazy" didn't try it. But where are the results? Well, there are no results. Or rather, they may have been once - "Who goes first, who goes first" - but now, you are not the first, and the market has long outgrown all available and cherished ways of predicting the colour of the next candle. The market is smarter than everyone....))))
+1. Predicting an instrument from the data of the instrument itself (e.g. predicting the euro-dollar from the euro-dollar data) is a futile matter. This is a well-known fact, researched and confirmed 10 years ago. So it does not make sense to step on a rake or try to re-invent the wheel - ....))
Svinozavr:
............
5. The important thing is that the objective measure and at the same time the front-end assessment tool is the financial instrument itself. I cannot refrain from analogies.
7. Any significant market event (even if it is not known) is reflected in prices as a pattern impulse. This impulse triggers a kind of synergistic mechanism (of which I know nothing - don't ask!), which allows you to make the appropriate geshefts.
......................
8. Practice, on the other hand, is such that there is practically nothing to say about it, as it is right in front of your eyes. Most TA indicators are capable (yes, capable! - designed) of answering questions about the definition of the context and working with it. Another thing is that you do NOT ask them. I bet you'll still be soaking in the rain, wearing sunscreen.
Friends! Some of you are wrong...
Who?
Friends! Some of you are wrong...
Who?
Taking phrases out of context does not lead to anything good ))))
Friends! Some of you are wrong...
Who?
Prediction based on what? - OK let it be TA, TA based on what (here is the new 99% correction branch working) Elliot? (missing) the more TA-methods in the forecast the more often it will come true (force majeure is not included in statistics). Practice - constant practice increases the quality of predictions.
I am talking about something else.
For example, it is sufficient to determine - i.e. predict - the direction of further development of the process in the near future. But you can set the task of predicting a particular price at a certain point in time, and it would be a completely different task. And the technique used in these approaches is different. And the results are different too.
Agreed.
Just what was I going to say? What I meant to say was that no one would think of inventing a new way of making a hammer, because in their opinion this way of making a hammer is not quite right. It's like reinventing the bicycle.
As for predicting the colour of the next candle, you can logically conclude that this idea was the first at the beginning of price charts in the form of candlesticks. And only the "lazy" didn't try it. But where are the results? Well, there are no results. Or rather, they may have been once - "Who goes first, who goes first" - but now, you are not the first, and the market has long outgrown all available and cherished ways of predicting the colour of the next candle. The market is smarter than everyone....))))
might see some analogies
http://www.vokrugsveta.ru/news/12765/
Good luck ;)
The way out - trade on the reverse principle! But how?
In theory, looking at the lost "result", we can assume that it is enough to reverse our "reflexes" and instead of losing there will be a profit. And the spread doesn't even seem to have anything to do with it, the trades are much bigger than the spread.
Ok, let's assume that we let the profit grow, no matter what. But the price is constantly "shaking" back and forth, and does not move in a straight line. This is where the "reflexes" come in! How can we check if it is time to take a profit/loss or keep moving the hair follicles?
The answer. Most likely, you can't.