Who still believes that the forex market is submitted to technical analysis? - page 25
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
You do not understand what I am talking about. I'm not talking about different providers missing more or less ticks. I was trying to explain that no matter at what frequency the ticks come in, a split tick array when analyzed by mathematical methods leads to strong distortions. I mean that this chart cannot be analyzed mathematically at all. The subject is about technical analysis, which implies, above all, mathematical analysis, which, I argue, does not work with a timeframe decimated chart. For it to work, you need to filter out the distortions on the bars or candlesticks, obtained from dividing the continuous stream of quotes and get a true, uninterrupted price line. Then there will be a miracle - it will be easy to see the behaviour of the price, you can apply the theory of inertial movement to predict the future value of the price. Anyway...... what am I going to tease you here? Whoever thinks about it will become a millionaire, and whoever argues first and thinks later will remain a trader.
What you say is not new, charting not on timeframes but on ticks.
Hi, maybe you can see the 'red' shift in the spectrum through the eyes of a wavemaker, then for a carpusculist the timeframe is a way of seeing a bit more in a private one. No distortion conspiracy :)
I'm not a wave maker. You can't properly plot waves on a distorted time division chart. There is no conspiracy of distortion. There are inherently established rules for the forex game. Before they were written, a mathematical model was created, in which one cannot start winning by applying mathematical analysis, otherwise a huge guard of university graduates with knowledge of methods of mathematical data processing will quickly make billions and the game will bankrupt itself. That's why "uncertainties" were introduced beforehand into the initial data (quotes) and "uncertainties" were introduced into the methods of giving those quotes, so that the probability of making the right decision would be an order of magnitude lower than getting the wrong one. Is this a "conspiracy of distortion"? - No, it's just the rules of the game you're playing. But the trouble is that you don't fully understand those rules either. Or maybe you don't want to understand them, because it's more interesting and easier to play the game the way the organizer suggests, rather than racking your brains? I am not trying to get you to start thinking. I am just capitalizing on those who think that "there is no conspiracy of distortion", and I am telling here because I know that no one will take my information seriously and the wheel will roll on the same, well-trodden path. How not to be embarrassed if you're told to your face that you're being cheated is very simple, you have not to admit the fact of the deception. There is no conspiracy of deception here and that's all there is to it....... you can shoot. Good luck to you all! Please forgive the provocative post.
You have a huge misunderstanding of what is going on here (in forex).
How, by whom and why currencies are traded. How a distributed system with several major centres remains coherent and consistent. How it all interacts with derivatives and related markets.
What you say is not new, charting not on timeframes but on ticks.
alexanderarieaa:
Times are a breakdown of strictly defined time periods. Tick charts are a breakdown by tick packs, I would say tick bars (each bar has the same number of ticks). BUT! it's no better. There is a varying time interval between ticks, so each tick pack will have a different market result due to one pack passing faster and the other slower and the price will vary not only because of how many ticks in each pack, but also because of how fast a particular pack formed in time. A tick chart makes sense then if one assumes that ticks come into the terminal at the same frequency, which is absolutely not the case. By the way, thanks for the reminder, I had some ideas about the tick chart. I will do it tomorrow.
But the trouble is, you don't fully understand these rules either. And maybe you do not want to understand them, because it is more interesting and easier to play the game as suggested by the game organizer, rather than rack your brains?
... charts can be formed as you want, you can block by 10 points for example, the essence is not the point, I was intrigued by your previous message, can you elaborate on that please
If you trade on demo, write that you trade on demo. boasting about demo profits is a bit strange.
If you trade on a demo account, the level of execution and spreads/commissions may be different for especially kitchen instruments (including crypto) on the demo and on the real account, so it's better to test on the real account.
is there any difference if you test on a demo account or on a real account in the tester?
are the quotes different?
... The charts can be formed as you want, you can do it in blocks of 10 pips each, for example... that's not the point... I was intrigued by your previous message, could you elaborate on it please?
1) I join ... more details if possible
and second
what to do with gaps?
or even simpler, i hope everyone remembers franc and no price (the same kind of gap) ... how to be))))
P. S. we or you again have invented Equivolume charts???
with all due respect ;)
Conclusion: it is far more important to engage in filtering than averaging out a messy spectrum of quotes. That is, moving averages are error superimposed on error. Filters, not moving averages and averaging indices built on their principle.
What do you call filters? Averages by definition are a low pass filter, their difference (MACD) is a bandpass filter. You can criticize them for low quality filtering, but that is a separate topic, so they are filters. So what is your complaint? Are mid-pass and derivatives not filters at all? Or are they bad filters and you need good ones?
What do you call filters? Average by definition is a low-pass filter, their difference (MACD) is a bandpass filter. You can criticise them for their poor filtering quality, but that is a separate topic, so they are filters. So what is your complaint? Are mid-pass and derivatives not filters at all? Or are they bad filters and you need good ones?
it's probably New Year's Eve)), not filters)))
actually it's funny )))
... waiting for the market magicians))) ahaha
P. S. not a reproach to you)))
again with all due respect )) to all participants ;) forum
Times are a breakdown of strictly defined time periods. Tick charts are a breakdown by tick packs, I would say tick bars (each bar has the same number of ticks). BUT! it's no better. There is a varying time interval between ticks, so each tick pack will have a different market result due to one pack passing faster and the other slower and the price will vary not only because of how many ticks in each pack, but also because of how fast a particular pack formed in time. A tick chart makes sense then if one assumes that ticks come into the terminal at the same frequency, which is absolutely not the case. By the way, thanks for the reminder, I had some ideas about the tick chart. I will do that tomorrow.