From theory to practice - page 96
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
and change expectations too.
That's funny :)))
That's funny :)))
Butpodotr is worth listening to - apparently he is one of the old warriors who knows something, but only shares his knowledge in a figurative way. And he, unlikebas, has already understood what we are talking about here.
P.S. I rememberpodotr under a totally different nickname :))))))
Butpodotr is worth listening to - apparently he is one of the old warriors who knows something, but only shares his knowledge in a figurative way. And he, unlikebas, has already understood what we are talking about here.
P.S. I rememberpodotr under a totally different nickname :))))))
The main thing. That there are and will be such people.
This is different, imho - very young and green. In ten years' time, there'll be a perfectly reasonable algotrader.
:)))))))))) I'll probably be gone in 10 years :))))))))
I told you - I got into forex by chance, at my daughter's request. In principle, I make enough money without it. But I think I have to do it. I read the old archives of this forum - that's where people were! It was really something to read. Where are they now? I wanted to discuss some problems with them here. And what do I see? Shameful and utter stupidity. It is painful to look at the modern crowd of traders who are as dumb as doors.
:)))))))))) I'll probably be gone in 10 years :))))))))
I told you - I got into forex by chance, at my daughter's request. In principle, I make enough money without it. But I think I have to do it. I read the old archives of this forum - that's where people were! It was really something to read. Where are they now? I wanted to discuss some problems with them here. And what do I see? Shameful and utter stupidity. It's painful to look at today's hoard of doorstep dumb traders.
The process of commercialisation has done its work. All the secrets have lurked forever.
Read the old archives of this forum - that's where the people were! It was really something to read. Where are they now?
The process of commercialisation has done its work. All the secrets have lurked forever.
It's a pity. I've just sat back and reread the archives... That's where the debate was!
Yeah, well, okay.
I checked the deviations for AUDCHF. The same Student's distribution with a sample of 13.800 ticks and an array of deviations from the moving average = 1.000.000 measurements.
Well, not exactly, of course, but I think increasing the number of measurements to 10,000,000 would be a nicer picture.
Why am I writing this?
For the brightest ones - we deal with the channel between the support and resistance levels calculated using quantiles of the nonstandardized Student's distribution with the number of degrees of freedom = 13.800 for the AUDCHF pair
crashed on the rocks of forex ))
Or maybe they crashed... Well, the hell with them. If they don't want to help, don't. We can manage without them.
The idea of multiplying distributions (imho) is more than sensible.
There are two processes in the market.
The process of position accumulation and/or allocation, in which prices move in a narrow corridor, although large volumes of open interest are accumulated (allocated).
And the process of price shifting, which may occur on small volumes, or even without them.
These two processes are fundamentally different in their essence and as a consequence their probability densities are also different.
If you learn to a) separate these densities and b) identify which process is in the completion phase, you will break Forex.
SZZ Accumulation and distribution are terms from VSA volumetric spread analysis (so you can google it).
Looked at the charts given by Alexander II.
Imho, no different from Bollinger at 1 minute. With a slightly modified approach to Bollinger you can get the same eggs, but in profile, and probably better. And you don't have to get clever.
That's how applied mathematics and physics differ from the basic sciences. Applied science tends to simplify everything to engineering solutions.