From theory to practice - page 832
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 don't know, I don't know... For SB I would understand a smooth change in deposit, even if relative to 0 (as Bass claims). But, for 30 trades to go into a steady '+', then to be tipped by just the 2nd... Then the same pattern again and again and again... - It's you know... I don't get it.
There's nothing to understand. An SB in a closed system and an SB in an open system are two big differences. Let's say SB in a system where there is no equilibrium, where there is no Mendeleev-Clyperon, or indeed nothing at all. You keep looking at models under ideal conditions. When and where did these models work in reality? Never and nowhere and they are not designed for this.
If you think about it, ) most physical laws are only formulated for closed systems and are not enforced in open systems. The laws of conservation or thermodynamics, for example.
Wipe your glasses, Rena! Out of almost 100 trades, only 6-7 trends are missed. Think about it!
6 or 7 negative trades puts out a hundred!!! No, the market is not the SB...
Yeah...and why did I tell you about the fat tails...who...who did I warn...
Yeah... why did I tell you about the fat tails... who... who did I warn...
those tails are Fourier in person, too.
My understanding is that there is a superposition of several waves of different periodicity, with a corresponding amplitude.
A period of up to 3 months allows traders to go through 3 months without draining ;)
These tails are also Fourier in vivo, if anything.
My understanding is that there is a superposition of several waves of different periodicity, with a corresponding amplitude.
A period of up to 3 months allows traders to survive for 3 months without draining ;)
They may or may not overlap, they may move just randomly, and they may stabilize in different ways...
I'm not trying anything, these are facts.
It doesn't make any difference how you look at the market, the conclusions are all the same.
Almost started to repeat my post above, phew, phew, fade away unclean ;)
There is nothing to understand. SB in a closed system and SB in an open system are two big differences. Say, SB in a system where there is no equilibrium, where there is no Mendeleev-Clyperon equilibrium, and nothing at all. You keep looking at models under ideal conditions. When and where did these models work in reality? Never and nowhere and they are not designed for this.
If you think about it, ) most physical laws are only formulated for closed systems and are not enforced in open systems. The laws of conservation or thermodynamics, for example.
If we consider inflationary expectations and capital emission at the input into an open system and withdrawal from circulation at the output, the resulting bias towards constant and systematic increase in the volume of money supply cannot be brought to a certain constant, when the internal balancing and self-regulation of the system forms arbitrage situations, which are difficult to define.
Can I put this in my personal book quote? :-)
Can I put this in my personal book quote? :-)
I don't remember how long I've been looking at the zigzag obtained with the school calculation. But definitely more than 2 months.
The zig-zag lagged badly, there was no way to get a positive trade outcome...
But is the zig-zag in the bottom window? Of course not, it's not a zig-zag ;)
It didn't overlap with the main chart.
But as it turned out, I didn't need it, it wasn't about that at all:
Done, gentlemen.
Yay!
The zigzag is not designed for this, it is an implementation of a piecewise monotonous function.