From theory to practice - page 1412
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
Half a year.
Please. Screenshots of the forex robot on this topic and over 1700 lines.
No use.
If you kill 10 like I did, then we'll talk.
he wrote the robot on the indu.................
You blow a 10 like I did, then we'll talk.
You've been stupid for 10 years and realised you're in a capital loss and can never make any money. I can't. ))))))))))))))))))))))))
How's your hedge fund doing?
If you do 10 years like I did, we'll talk about it.
You should at least brag about the real one.
And I'm warning you not to spend another 10 years uselessly.
I got lost. I went to the formulae to calculate how much I had lost on a martin. And how much I could have made on the wood or the quid if I had kept it in the bank.
Probably enough to buy a flat.
Yur, did you buy more or sell more on the exchange today?
I think I was buyingI was selling, but I'm not a legal person.... And people think I was martin'.
It's not a grail, it's what it's supposed to be, not to fight a loss but to make money.
And the forex, the exchange - makes no difference, that's not the point, as the kotir goes the same way.
The only difference is in the money taking mechanism and trading conditions.
I do not use this chart in trading, I just made sure now that I am right.
You have to think less). Especially for someone and not for yourself.
You should think less). Especially for someone else and not for yourself.
Right
sure thing
I see. No facts.
Then it looks like there really won't be your losing trades on your signal.
There will be the only one from the DC with the comment SO.
Judging by the logic of trading the next order BUY 0.75 )))
In addition to this post:
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and trading strategy testing
From Theory to Practice
Alexander_K, 2019.07.19 22:13
Exactly!
Vo:
White noise with a normal distribution by definition does not contain any patterns. I.e. the probability of rising or falling at any time is estimated as 50% / 50% and independent of historical data.
With such inputs it is guaranteed to earn with the following algorithm:
1. Buy the asset at the current price.
2. We put a take profit on the rise, for example 1%.
3. If the take profit worked, we have earned 1%. End of scheme. We withdraw the money.
4. If the price goes down and take has not worked out, we buy for twice more amount. Take Take shall be moved up by the pullback value.
Then we repeat from point 3.
Unlimited capital is a necessary guarantee of making money.
I wonder why Che works with such small lots on a big deposit. Yes, just to meet, as a first approximation, the last condition! I see...
No, I'm not being ironic. If it's a working system, why not?
There's at least 1 other way to overpower a random process and it's described in this thread.
Take Laplace motion and look:
We see:
The top chart is a desperate fight against a random process using a MA and a channel around it. The result is strictly +0% profit, h.p.
Lower chart - a random process is bluntly outplayed using Warlock's algorithm (by the way - where is he? Is he alive? I'm worried about something...).
The problem is that real BP isn't exactly Laplace motion, it's a bit more complicated...
So, if dull-witted sufferers would learn to reduce real BP to a random process, or use indicators to separate trendy, deterministic movements, then there would be no problem... ....
Alas, on this forum, only the blind-eyed are blinking their eyes into the monitor screen and suffering from dibilism. Ugh...
I read somewhere that one of the most reliable strategies is martingale. I don't know much about it, but it's like opening a trade and then opening another one with double the lot, etc. at certain intervals. In my opinion, this is the strategy Che uses and it really allows to beat the SB, which the market seems to many people.
Allows not to beat, but to temporarily beat, until the "poker" comes.
The only question is how quickly you get unlucky. Luck can last for years under favourable circumstances.
Martingale is not a strategy, it's a way of money management. It doesn't change the mathematical expectation of the original system, it only redistributes it over time, figuratively speaking. It postpones the end.
All information is taken from math textbooks.
Bottom graph - a random process is being bluntly beaten using Warlock's algorithm (where is he, by the way? Is he alive? I'm worried about him...)
what kind of algorithm?