Teach me how to make money. - page 16
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
was being conducted with her in mind... I don't get it, to be honest.
And why would trading with a price assumption=changing the price chart.
What does this have to do with your "you can NOT change the price chart at will"? In order to change outcome statistics based on price chart analysis (and not to change outcome statistics based on outcome statistics), I don't need to change the price itself.
The parameters for changing both the price and your statistics of outcomes, which is based on that very price. It's just a furry little animal.
Let's go over it again...
If you are working with a PRICE chart, then you have the trading conditions that the MARKETMAKER creates for you. He will decide how much the price will go in one direction, or how much it will "pull the cat" in a flat.
AT THE SAME TIME, I, working with the STATISTICS chart, will have the trading conditions that STATISTICS (not the maker) creates for me... and I don't give a damn about all the flat and no-rebuttal prices put together, because "... The parameters of change..." of my statistics will look no more like the parameters of the price on which it is "... and made..." than I look like Stevie Wonder
...
You seem to keep on talking ABOUT YOURSELF, which does not coincide at all with the content of my words.
I don't mean anything bad against you, but simply stating the fact of our mutual misunderstanding.
If you need, I will continue to try to express the meaning of my words.
Well, if you don't give a damn, then we can stop here.
What do you say...?
I have been trading three pairs for three months.
I have an EA that has been trading on three pairs for three months, trades are decent, balance is around zero.
can you advise on MM to keep the owls in profit ?
what information do i need ?
I will give you the investment password so users can see the changes.
You seem to keep on talking ABOUT YOU, which does not coincide at all with what I have said.
I don't mean anything bad against you, I'm just stating the fact of our mutual misunderstanding.
If you need me to, I will continue trying to make my point.
Well, if you don't care, then we can call it a day.
What do you say...?
I didn't think towards the direction that you mean anything bad against me)))), nor did I towards you.
But at the same time, I'm not sure the misunderstanding is mutual. In no way did I mean to interfere with your expression of thoughts. Simply some of your retorts seem so, how shall I put it more correctly, affirmatively pronounced, that the substantiation of this point of view interests, though it is necessary to agree that also an argument about all this makes no sense without any concrete points and illustrations. Which clearly you will not have, except of course in the abstract. Therefore it is not possible to justify a point of view.
Since all this is becoming pointless, I take my leave and will not disturb.
By the way Forte also told you on p3 that you are in fact analysing the price, albeit indirectly, and using just an assumption about the direction, even though you don't know it yourself.
Although, as you said, it is a matter of taste. And if you don't care about such trifles as rational use of depo, trading on more than one instrument, the drawdown after all. Then maybe yes, you are doing quite well. And "carpet bombing" is better for you than "sniper tactics".
But I personally care about these "little things". And for me, the quality of your bombing is less than that of a sniper. And I wouldn't even bother with my opinion if you didn't say otherwise. But you started to present your approach as equally good, which did not seem justified to me.
...
Well, if passions aren't running high, and there's a chance to talk business, then let me REALLY draw attention to the BACKGROUND of my statement on this thread:
"I am not suggesting any particular method of dealing with the Transaction Statistics data. I assert that it is RATIOFUL NOT to pay attention to this data (!), for in this case it becomes almost impossible to lose on the Forex Market, even to those who never managed to find a profitable TS".
That's what I wanted to say on this thread.
From this point, the conversation can go in two directions: 1) someone from the reader may ask to substantiate my statement; and 2) we can proceed to a discussion of specific methods of working with Outcome Statistics, where my participation is not required, because there are "lots" of methods and many people know more about them than me. I can offer you these words as a response to my esteemedStells, on his post about MM. I am happy to speculate here about his particular case, but as an ordinary interlocutor.
So, if anyone has a desire, let's better go to the SEARCH for an effective solution in some particular case (like Stells), instead of trying to point out my mistakes, which, by the way, I did not do here
(I simply did NOT offer any specific solution here yet).
OK...?
Well, if passions are not running high, and there is a chance to talk business, then let me REALLY draw attention to the BACKGROUND of my statement in this thread:
"I am not suggesting any particular method of dealing with the data of the Transaction Statistics. I assert that it is RATIOFUL NOT to pay attention to this data (!), for in this case it becomes almost impossible to lose on the Forex Market, even to those who never managed to find a profitable TS".
That's what I wanted to say on this thread.
This is what everyone already knows, and in this thread no one denied the benefits of THIS, and its name has long been known-MM. All we are saying here is that it's much more effective to use MM with already positive MO.
Rather than turning the balance to positive values with MM only. And if you dig even deeper, MM pulls the balance in plus-it is a manifestation of the patterns in the price. So you use the same price regularities, only from a different angle, however painful it is to acknowledge.)
1-To ask you to justify the obvious ( NOT RATIONALLY NOT to pay attention to MM), I don't see the point.
2- About this and wrote, of course the specific methods of balance in the plus, only MM at random inputs from you will not be, for this reason, and said from the start that the debate does not make sense. I am only against the expression on page 3 about unreasonable difficulties.
This is what everyone already knows, and no one in this thread has ever denied the benefits of THIS, and the name has long been known-MM. It was just saying that it's much more effective to apply MM to trades with already positive MO.
Rather than turning the balance to positive values with MM only. And if you dig even deeper, MM pulls the balance in plus-it is a manifestation of the patterns in the price. So in a twisted form you are using the same price regularities, only from a different angle, however much it hurts to admit it).
1-To ask you to justify the obvious ( NOT RATIONALLY NOT to pay attention to MM), I see no point.
2- About this and wrote, of course the specific methods of balance in the plus, only MM at random inputs from you will not be, for this reason, and said from the start that the debate does not make sense. I am only against the expression on page 3 about unreasonable difficulties.
There is still a PRINCIPLE discrepancy in your words with the meaning of my words...