The riddle: the distribution bell rattles - the broker says the price, whoever it hits sheds tears and loses their deposit. - page 3

New comment
 
Martin Cheguevara:
At least 10 years of history.


A living example of 10 years


When you leave town, you see a schoolboy playing ball in the fields.


and when you come back, you see that he's already bought a neighbouring plot, built a house there, babysat the kids and is making good money.

 
Mickey Moose:


A living example of 10 years


When you leave town, you see a schoolboy playing ball in the fields.


and when you come back, you see that he's already bought a neighbouring plot, built a house there, is babysitting and earning good money.

There you go.

Broke the man's business plan.

now no one will tell him anything....

 
Who else is going to squeeze something 'clever' out of their brain?)
 
Martin Cheguevara:
Who else is going to squeeze something 'clever' out of their brain?)


The number of losers should be greater than the number of winners (Well, or volume).

 
Martin Cheguevara:
Who else is going to squeeze something "clever" out of their brain?)

What is the reason for your dissatisfaction? - all according to plan... as the topic topic-starter - started such a discussion

If you've got a good idea, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in ticks, but if you don't like it, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in volatility... - and you can go to ticks and there will be bells, you can go to price increments and there...

and what does it give? it only makes sure that 99% of price data analysis will have a random distribution law

you can spin these bells and bells indefinitely, which is what they're doing on this forum ))))

 
Igor Makanu:

What is the reason for your dissatisfaction? - all according to plan... as the topic topic-starter - started such a discussion

If you've got a good idea, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in ticks, but if you don't like it, you may want to ask the price increase or the increase in volatility... - and you can go to ticks and there will be bells, you can go to price increments and there...

and what does it give? it only makes sure that 99% of price data analysis will have a random distribution law

you can spin these bells and bells indefinitely, which is what they're doing on this forum ))))

Yes, that's right. Most people don't even know what they are talking about or where they are going in terms of analysing financial instruments. The most interesting thing is that not a single person on this forum. They have not been able to give a clear explanation of the validity of the analysis results. And in this case, many try and think that auto-optimization will help).
I just decided to see if there are any people here at all who raise the realities of the market. I just decided to see if there were any people here who could even raise the realities of the market.
 
Martin Cheguevara:
I'm just getting tired of hearing the "c&w Don Quixote's ramblings". And the riddle is such a humorous form of a very serious monumental question. This riddle hides everything you need to trade if such a thing is possible)
On the subject of markets, I could s@tk any mathematician with hard facts if anything)
But I'm not going to waste time on useless debates...
Well, in a month we'll see if anyone comes along.)

I don't see much point in shutting up forum mathematicians - you should "fight" those mathematicians who write algorithms for market makers.

On the subject. The main problem is that the sample distribution of increments does not uniquely determine the real distribution of increments in the case of a process with non-stationary increments.

 
Martin Cheguevara:
I just decided to see if there are any people here who are aware of the realities of the market. I just wanted to see if there were any people who understood that analysis makes no sense at all, unless of course its parameters are completely dependent on the market itself.

I see what the topic is about - the topic is about the fact that technical analysis makes no sense

 
Igor Makanu:

I see what the topic is about - the topic is about the fact that technical analysis makes no sense

I think that's more accurate: the topic is about how no analysis makes sense at all

 
Олег avtomat:

I think that's more accurate: the point is that no analysis at all makes sense

Exactly!) It doesn't make sense as long as it's not clear what we're analysing)

(Randomness has patterns too.)
12345678
New comment
Reason: