[Archive] Learn how to make money villagers! - page 611
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
I see. On the previous post - aware.
Thank you.
You can make a small trade on a limited number of instruments from $2000-$3000. You won't make millions, but you can get a feel for what's what.
Five cents from me to the villagers.
I think he trades less aggressively than the owls in the first post.
Euro quid dc for foi.
If you ever want to go to America, here: http://finviz.com/store/stock-brokers.ashx
You can make a small trade on a limited number of instruments from $2000-$3000. You won't make millions, but you can get a feel for it.
Thanks for the EA. It's a shame everything is "bricked up" and without source code.
I'm sick and tired of watching the bickering here...
The idea of Forex is that no matter how hard one tries to win/earn at Forex, one still loses. Why, you may ask?
1. The probability of winning is lowered below 0,5 due to the existence of the spread, no matter how small it is.
it means you should try to take as many pips as possible, exceeding the spread and shenanigans of the fix
2. It is necessary to raise the probability above 0.5 because the rate goes up and down and this is a direct way to lock the loss... All trading strategies on the trend is about them, they are doomed to lose
The probability level can only be increased with a large number of trades against the trend!!!!, so Ilan is a very influential system compared to some
3. И... Accordingly, the fairest application of MM and RM concept is exactly 50% drawdown, and given the level at which the deposit is removed, the drawdown should be:
(100%-20%)/2 = 40% - the maximum allowable drawdown level
Name me a trading system, in which everything is exactly the same, no matter how it is defended )))).
And I am coming to the conclusion more and more, that it does not matter at all what to do - SELL or BUY ))))
And more and more I am coming to the conclusion that it doesn't matter at all whether to SELL or BUY ))))
Don't panic... There are, there are, SELL and BUY signals, and you know them.
As the great Carlson said: "Calm down, Kid, just calm down."
These are the words of a true Yogi, firmly on the Path of Knowledge with his degraded foot.
Here's an example - BUY
The trick is that by saving a minuscule deal with a huge deposit, we become a tidbit for DCs.
The time will come, they'll try us out, and they'll love it.
Because the targets are small.
It's that mismatch that puts the whole company in jeopardy.
The trick is that by saving a minuscule deal with a huge deposit, we become a tidbit for the DCs.
The time will come, they will try us out, and they will like it.
An acquaintance of mine used to be a money changer under the roof of the law...
Got fat, and they made a pop. Couldn't resist.
Good thing I had a gut feeling, I chipped in.
I'm sick and tired of watching the bickering here...
The idea of Forex is that no matter how hard one tries to win/earn at Forex, one still loses. Why, you may ask?
1. The probability of winning is lowered below 0,5 due to the existence of the spread, no matter how small it may be.
It's all nonsense and nonsense.
You can't win at a casino on the average roulette. But, who was in these very casinos, knows very well, that there roulette tables are one and two and a few, and those who want to win, play Black Jack.
Again, it begs the question, why Black Jack and not Roulette? After all, roulette is also supposed to have a negative expected payoff, but it's more conservative, i.e. -2.8%, and Black Jack has -7%. The answer is obvious, in Black Jack you can count cards left in the deck and calculate probabilities and consequently bet on the positive expected payoff. But in roulette, no matter how you count, but probability remains the same and negative expected payoff for fixed bet will always remain at the same level.
That's the secret of the trick. Those who have learned how to calculate probabilities of deals, they can obtain the positive expectation. Those who reckon at random that a Grider or Martin, changing and tweaking something in the system (they have been changing and tweaking these "stable earning" systems for hundreds of years, and as it is still there), then they will start to manage by themselves are deeply mistaken - such systems without good TA in any case will have only negative expected payoff. And with good TA, ie with positive expected payoff, no gridders and martins are needed, because it is more adequate to trade with a conservative percentage of the deposit.
The problem with griders is that they are not designed to earn money. The system is designed in such a way that if you are lucky, the TS will manage to increase the deposit before it runs out of money. I.e. the principle is similar to that of a petty swindler: if you manage to take it, you should run. If you get lucky, you have to withdraw money before you lose it. Again, if we assume luck, then there is a dilemma, because for griders, the smaller the depot size, the higher the probability of withdrawal:
1. If you withdraw part of the money from the deposit, the deposit will be reduced and therefore the probability of it being drained will increase. Correspondingly, the risk of losing the part of the deposit that is not withdrawn and withdrawn is greatly increased.
2. If one does not withdraw anything, the probability of loss decreases, but it is still high enough to drain the entire deposited amount, and one runs the risk of losing both one's own and the winnings.
3. if you withdraw all the money, the risk becomes zero, but the grader will not "earn" any more.
And so the dummy goes through all three steps from step 1 to step 3, finally realizing that it is better not to bet anything on the grider, than to try to get some kopecks in between losing deposits, because the grider is not originally designed to earn money, but only for some lucky breaks.