# Not the Grail, just a regular one - Bablokos!!! - page 136

Mathemat:

Maybe it's Multipoints - if by TA this nickname doesn't mean TA, but Tactics Adverzu? There really is such a nickname (...) - I think it's on Spider. Very famous, by the way.

Or it's an impostor under their nickname.

No, I am directly related to the nickname you know.

A legitimate outcome.

abdul1:
I'd be grateful for both.

No problem,- here is the current market view by the indicator:

In static mode, you can look at his view of the market at any previous moment.

Mischek2:

It has come to this . Three dots. No sex, no name. Nothing at all. I suggest the next nickname is... --- ...
The name is on the profile. It obviously implies gender ;) You could have looked it up if it was that important.

...:
No, I am directly related to the nickname you know.
Then you are welcome to join us!

...:

Let's take a stricter approach to conclusions. In order to match price and coin, an equal series of real, not theoretical flips must be conducted.

Until this is done, the outcome of the coin series is only a hypothesis. A hypothesis is not proof.

That is, it has not yet been established in practice that flipping (literal, not theoretical) a coin has similar outcomes, both in parts and in aggregate. Right?

If the two series coincide, then by what can we conclude that both processes are random, or that the randomness of one (the price) can be proved through the randomness of the other (the coin) if they are two different unrelated entities?

Wouldn't the only right thing to do for now be to recognize the outcome of a trading strategy as successful at points where profits occur and unsuccessful at points where losses occur? And don't create entities.

Your strategy does not prove the absence (or impossibility in principle) of other strategies, which would more successfully describe the tested area. Right?

You asked for my view.

My colleagues and I have been involved in discussions like ours a couple of times. For example, we were asked to test our strategy on the suggested data. This was the result - http://forex.kbpauk.ru/userfiles/126921-synt.png

Discussion of it - http://forex.kbpauk.ru/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/125057/page/2/fpart/3/vc/1 starting from post #126921

When comparing, the following was meant: if you can stably earn on eagle, you can easily do it on the market.

Mathemat:
Then welcome to us!
Thank you:)

abdul1:

When comparing, what was meant was that: if you can make steady money on the eagle, you can easily do it on the market.

Our (Multipoint) research does not support this. On the contrary, the curve on the PRNG is of higher quality than the curve from the real markets. It's been 11 years since the first experiments, 6 years since the ones I gave in the link.

The real market is predicted by our studies to be worse than any (that we have tested) generators.

These results were independently confirmed by creation - http://forex.kbpauk.ru/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/191813/page/0/fpart/1/vc/1

tara:

No problem,- here is the current market view with the indicator:

In static mode, you can look at his view of the market at any previous moment.