TRADING IS SIMPLE ... (TheRumpledOne)

Euler09 · Dec 18, 2017

TheRumpledOne said:
Been trading since before the internet. Back in the paper, pencil and ruler days.

Your conclusion about the rat and Yale students is flawed.

Your conclusion that the rats approach mainly accepting the simple solution and the modest improvement with disregard to improving his/her results is wrong.

Eventually the students would figure out one of two things.
1.) There is a pattern and the solution produces the most favorable outcome.
2.)There is no solution, the food placement seems random with a bias towards the left side.

TheRumpledOne · Dec 18, 2017

Euler09 said:
Your conclusion about the rat and Yale students is flawed.

Your conclusion that the rats approach mainly accepting the simple solution and the modest improvement with disregard to improving his/her results is wrong.

Eventually the students would figure out one of two things.
1.) There is a pattern and the solution produces the most favorable outcome.
2.)There is no solution, the food placement seems random with a bias towards the left side.

"Wrong"? How so?

Euler09 · Dec 18, 2017

TheRumpledOne said:
Been trading since before the internet. Back in the paper, pencil and ruler days.

Your conclusion about the rat and Yale students is flawed.

Your conclusion that the rats approach mainly accepting the simple solution and the modest improvement with disregard to improving his/her results is wrong.

Eventually the students would figure out one of two things.
1.) There is a pattern and the solution produces the most favorable outcome.
2.)There is no solution, the food placement seems random with a bias towards the left side.

TheRumpledOne said:
"Wrong"? How so?

I just told you . the rats win that example because they don't waste time look for a solution when there is none but that is just a coincidence.

If you set up the experiment and used a pattern of food distribution of {LLR,LLR...} thwle Yale students would figure this out and find the food every time, while the rat would stay left always and get food 2/3 times.

So the results would be 66.66%.. to 100% and your faulty logic would conclude that the Yale students approach was superior.

Tldr: faulty logic bro

baro-san · Dec 18, 2017

Euler09 said:
Your conclusion about the rat and Yale students is flawed....

Tldr: faulty logic bro

You're funny

You say that your logic beats the experiment's results!

There are other, smarter, interpretations of the results of the experiment, but you can't invalidate them with your logic. You're funny ...

Euler09 · Dec 18, 2017

baro-san said:
You're funny You say that your logic beats the experiment's results!

There are other, smarter, interpretations of the results of the experiment, but you can't invalidate them with your logic. You're funny ...

I said my logic beats the experiments results? Where do I say that Einstein?

The results stay the same , the conclusion is what is faulty. I'm not "funny" you just lack reading comprehension.

TheRumpledOne · Dec 19, 2017

TheRumpledOne · Dec 19, 2017

Can we debate the issue and not insult each other?

I am not sure how the conclusion is faulty? First, what do you think the conclusion is?

Euler09 · Dec 19, 2017

TheRumpledOne said:
Can we debate the issue and not insult each other?

I am not sure how the conclusion is faulty? First, what do you think the conclusion is?

Did you read post #423?

ToddGaack23 · Dec 19, 2017

TRO,

The problem with picking one direction is it reduces potential profitable trades by 50%. How do you overcome that?

ToddGaack23 · Dec 19, 2017

Euler09 said:
I said my logic beats the experiments results? Where do I say that Einstein?

The results stay the same , the conclusion is what is faulty. I'm not "funny" you just lack reading comprehension.

There is no pattern in random events. Your fault is logicy.