A good pic is better than a thousand words. I have made a pic and I will add words to it to explain it.
Neural networks open possibilities. However, too many users these days do not understand the possibilities.
Neural networks learn prices, fluctuations, patterns... In fact, whatever you feed into a neural network (really - whatever!!), it will learn it. Can I feed random prices? Yes! Can I feed random prices of random symbols? Yes! Can I feed bullshit? Yes! It will learn it.
It will learn it. It is not a problem. The problem arises from learning too much.
Why this post? Because too many users buy bad strategies that show an incredible growth in the historical chart. Too many users do not buy good strategies because they think that a mediocre historical chart will not allow them to make a profit on Forex. Good strategies fall into oblivion, that is to the bottom of the ranking system, which is based on greed and not on analysis or credibility.
So what? Make a real live signal, run it for half a year and show a profit with your good strategy. Prove that it works. Yes, this is what I tried. And they still don't buy, because they found hundreds of strategies that show an incredible growth (from 1k to 1 trillion in several years, literally) in the nice historical chart.
Why this post? I do not want to be a liar. I do not want to sell nice historical charts.
This new strategy "Intraday Rush" shows several levels of accuracy in the training. These levels are defined by the property "Trading pattern". The "reliable" level has a much higher chance to win in the unknown period. While the "ultimate" level, despite the mind-blowing profitability in history, has a much worse chance of winning in the unknown period. This is it. I have written it. I have explained it.
Does the market never repeat itself? Is it true that, from this standpoint, an absolutely unprofitable strategy in history should have the best chance to win in the unknown period? Maybe yes!!!
This is what I think. History has some valuable patterns. A good strategy should try to learn the very basic pattern-like moves from history. Therefore, it should demonstrate profitability in any long period running for at least a year. A good strategy should have drawdowns and wrong trades leading to frustration in some periods. And it should win in other periods. This is what makes a good strategy.
Sometimes users do not want a profit on Forex. They want to buy a hope at this particular moment of their lives and be happy for a few days with that false hope. Yes, I understand it. Switch to the "ultimate" level, this is your false hope. Some users can't stop believing that a nice historical pic will not lead to a profit in the unknown period. Yes, I understand this, too.
Why this post? After months or even years of playing around with so many "nice" strategies out there, come back and read this post again. And switch to the "reliable" trading pattern of "Intraday Rush".
Neural networks open possibilities. However, too many users these days do not understand the possibilities.
Neural networks learn prices, fluctuations, patterns... In fact, whatever you feed into a neural network (really - whatever!!), it will learn it. Can I feed random prices? Yes! Can I feed random prices of random symbols? Yes! Can I feed bullshit? Yes! It will learn it.
It will learn it. It is not a problem. The problem arises from learning too much.
Why this post? Because too many users buy bad strategies that show an incredible growth in the historical chart. Too many users do not buy good strategies because they think that a mediocre historical chart will not allow them to make a profit on Forex. Good strategies fall into oblivion, that is to the bottom of the ranking system, which is based on greed and not on analysis or credibility.
So what? Make a real live signal, run it for half a year and show a profit with your good strategy. Prove that it works. Yes, this is what I tried. And they still don't buy, because they found hundreds of strategies that show an incredible growth (from 1k to 1 trillion in several years, literally) in the nice historical chart.
Why this post? I do not want to be a liar. I do not want to sell nice historical charts.
This new strategy "Intraday Rush" shows several levels of accuracy in the training. These levels are defined by the property "Trading pattern". The "reliable" level has a much higher chance to win in the unknown period. While the "ultimate" level, despite the mind-blowing profitability in history, has a much worse chance of winning in the unknown period. This is it. I have written it. I have explained it.
Does the market never repeat itself? Is it true that, from this standpoint, an absolutely unprofitable strategy in history should have the best chance to win in the unknown period? Maybe yes!!!
This is what I think. History has some valuable patterns. A good strategy should try to learn the very basic pattern-like moves from history. Therefore, it should demonstrate profitability in any long period running for at least a year. A good strategy should have drawdowns and wrong trades leading to frustration in some periods. And it should win in other periods. This is what makes a good strategy.
Sometimes users do not want a profit on Forex. They want to buy a hope at this particular moment of their lives and be happy for a few days with that false hope. Yes, I understand it. Switch to the "ultimate" level, this is your false hope. Some users can't stop believing that a nice historical pic will not lead to a profit in the unknown period. Yes, I understand this, too.
Why this post? After months or even years of playing around with so many "nice" strategies out there, come back and read this post again. And switch to the "reliable" trading pattern of "Intraday Rush".
·
2
