Looking for patterns - page 292
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
To show how far behind Nikitin is in progress).
It's clear with you..., and you've shown how progressive your strategies are...
https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/884186#!tab=account
The only thing that hurts is that my last name is involved in all this crap...
It's clear with you..., and you've shown how progressive your strategies are...
https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/884186#!tab=account
The only thing that hurts is that my last name is involved in this rottenness...
Friends, this is my opinion on the topic of this thread. You should not look for patterns either by trial and error or by using higher mathematics. You will not make a revolution in the market like Einstein did in physics. Laws can be searched for all your life, and one out of 1000 will be lucky to find a useful grain, and who knows how much time he will spend on it.
All or almost all useful things have been found before you. For example, the trend entry trade after a pullback. Account for overbought and oversold on the higher TFs. Accounting for volatility. Buy low, sell high. Account for and use of levels. Accounting for the time of day when entering. The use of lot manipulation. And to all of this a great many indicators. And perhaps something else I may have forgotten.
Conclusion: it will be more profitable if you spend your time and energy not on searching for regularities, but on development of robots that will most effectively use this legacy of the past.
Of course this is my personal opinion. There are probably some who don't really need profitable robots because they are financially secure. But they are interested in exploration and research, so-called science fans. I have nothing against them, so be it. But my advice to those who need to earn extra income and want to eventually create their own profitable robot.
To argue that this individual has made a revolution,
you have to delve a little bit into the time in which he lived and the society in which he socialised.
One can get the impression, and even be sure, that there was no revolution.
There was a fitting and a pushing of certain "facts".
Everything useful or almost everything has been found here before you. For example, trading when entering a trend after a pullback.
If indeed " everything useful or almost everything has been found ", the statistics would not be so depressing...
And here is an important factor - ANY task can be solved in several different ways, in this case - room for creativity, even if really "all useful or almost all found"...
If indeed "all or almost all is found", the statistics would not be so depressing...
And here the important factor is that ANY task can be solved in several different ways, in this case - room for creativity, even if really "all useful or almost all found"...
Statistics say that there are few people who have managed to use effectively what has already been found before them. So the question is whether they can effectively use something new, even if they discover it? You still have to create a profitable robot, which is a difficult task as challenging as discovering something new. And if they cannot make a profitable robot using what others have found, where is the guarantee that what they have found will allow them to do so?
And there is always room for creativity. The question I raised is whether it is more profitable to make a creative effort to find new patterns or to develop a robot using old, already known patterns.
It's clear with you..., and you've shown how progressive your strategies are...
https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/884186#!tab=account
The only thing that hurts is that my name is involved in all this crap...
that's right, you're the one who's draining your accounts, that's why they make algorithms based on your motives, and that's what we have - your idea - and a reflection of it in the moniker
And there is always room for creativity. The question I raised is whether it is more profitable to make creative efforts to find new patterns or to develop a robot using old, already known patterns.
Is there anything substantive to discuss?
That's right, you're draining your own accounts, so they make algorithms based on your motives, and that's your idea - and the reflection of it in the monitor
That's what I'm saying...
Who's too lazy to think, they'll think that the strategy was made based on my idea... That's why it's not respectable to stick my name on it without explaining it...
That's what I mean...
Those who are too lazy to think will think that the strategy was made on my idea... So it's not solid to stick my name on it without explaining it...
I'll delete it, or else someone will sign up for such a signal...)