Lol that is hilarious and true! And if you pee against the wind well you get splattered.
Is price movement really random and unpredictable?
- Thread starter schizo
- Start date
You must not know how to use the traders equation in conjunction with reading PA or you would not say that. At least use the peeing methodology above. If traders equation is too complicated for you. Lol
Imho, the most important time frame is all of them, they just are not equally impactful at any given time. All depends on one's type of analytics, but most action can be quantified using shorter time frames, but when action can be quantified using long and very long time frames, their impact can be dramatic. One thing that is very difficult to do is tie the relationship of long term time frames to short term volatility, but there is definitely a relationship there.
I once had a bug in my backtest code which allowed me to peek one 5sec bar into the future, which gave some incredible returns.
Got zero sympathy for suckers in this game but occasionally it's hard to pass by without remarking on the bullshit. Continue shoveling. You ain't got much time remaining.
(According to Fischer Black) noise is the opposite of information, the imperfection intrinsic to our observations, but also a distinction between two categories of market actors, the informed and the noisy. Without the latter, the former cannot trade much.
“Noise trading provides the essential missing ingredient [to the whole structure of financial markets]. . . . People who trade on noise are willing to trade even though from an objective point of view they would be better off not trading. Perhaps they think the noise they are trading on is information. Or perhaps they just like to trade” (Black 1986, 532)
Who, then, are these noise traders on whom the informed traders depend so much? While the distinction rests partly on possessing information, or relevant information, it also has to be a structural one. Possessing information, or being informed, cannot be independent of the social fabric of finance. Therefore, noise trading cannot be exclusively related to some abstract, presumably less good, possession of information. Noise trading has to be linked to the arrangements, channels, and processes through which one comes into this possession.
What is this noise trading that provides the essential missing ingredient, and what does it look like in practice? Without noise traders, there is no information; liquidity in the market is low; trading is reduced or comes to a standstill. Without noise traders, prices would not be estimates of value, but value itself. In such an ideal state of the market, everybody would be happy but also very certain of what he or she knows and of what others know, so that there would be no trading.
What would the result have been if you traded the entire session with full focus, then? What's your average take on a daily session?
I believe I asked you this in the past, but you refused to answer.
As for the rest of your post, I'll just skip that as our methodologies are different, but I'm sure someone might find it helpful.
What's dumb about it?
It seems to me that the "The Trader's equation" is just Al Brooks re-branding of the old expectancy formula which every trader is subject to.
At the end of the day no matter what approach you subscribe to, your trades summarized will come out with an average win, average loss and a win/loss %.
I think you're assigning far more numeric specificity and constancy to the markets than they actually offer.
Remember the definition of a calculator? A device that let's you take 2 seat-of-the-pants estimates, multiply them, and get accuracy to the 10th decimal place.