PROOF That Forex is RANDOM video

[EnlightenedJoe]

...and they got paid for losing money

Why shouldn't they ? You want them to do it for free ? If people are too lazy to lose by themselves, it's only right they should pay someone else a fee to do it for them.

The trouble with people is they want free lunch, when in reality no such thing exists. How else will they learn if they don't pay for education ?

 

[goose4]

Their number is a bit off. My gut indicator says 99.9%.

If you already know, why did you start the thread ?

I thought it would be interesting for new traders to present the notion that random

generated data looks exactly like real markets. That a pro trader would not be able

to distinguish the difference with random charts vs real market charts.

That all the technical laws like Elliott wave,channels,fractals and support and resistance are seen on random charts.

Most of the folk here are noobs, so this will help them learn something.

 

[metrader]

Why shouldn't they ? You want them to do it for free ? If people are too lazy to lose by themselves, it's only right they should pay someone else a fee to do it for them.

The trouble with people is they want free lunch, when in reality no such thing exists. How else will they learn if they don't pay for education ?

They were more interested in making some money than learning about financial markets I suppose

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

I thought it would be interesting for new traders to present the notion that random

generated data looks exactly like real markets. That a pro trader would not be able

to distinguish the difference with random charts vs real market charts.

Most of the folk here are noobs, so this will help them learn something.

Yes, I see what you are getting at. Reverse logics are generally confusing. So I was taken in.

Noobs think there are patterns not because they naturally believe there is. Rather they are educated to be that way. I don't believe you can reverse that education. I tried it with my own brother with the very best knowledge and insights that is humanly possible and it was a complete loss. I am not optimistic on your endeavour.

 

[EnlightenedJoe]

They were more interested in making some money than learning about financial markets I suppose

It's usually they have too much money. So others taking from them is no big deal. On the back of every blood sucker is another blood sucker. When someone has too much blood, it's usually they are too good at getting it from someone else. If they lose a little, it's just karma.

 

[goose4]

Yes, I see what you are getting at. Reverse logics are generally confusing. So I was taken in.

Noobs think there are patterns not because they naturally believe there is. Rather they are educated to be that way. I don't believe you can reverse that education. I tried it with my own brother with the very best knowledge and insights that is humanly possible and it was a complete loss. I am not optimistic on your endeavour.

yeah good post dude.Unlearn to learn.

 

[gerryg]

He used random data to produce bar charts. He is a great computer programer.

These charts look 100 percent like real market charts. No different,using random data input.

Buffet once put it more simpler - if you try to turn over price chart you essentially get the same

 

[CavaliereVerde]

The video is very informative but forex is not 100% random.
->https://www.dukascopy.com/fxcomm/fx-article-contest/?Forex-Is-Not-A-Random&action=read&id=1915
Not random but very close to random.
Human eye cannot distinguish forex from random walks and 99% of TA is useless crap.
It is very efficient so you need very good backtests to mine the small inefficiencies.

 

[Pure Pip Producer]

Interesting video.

Enjoy!

Well... 1 hour 24 min 18 sec, speacking and looking at the past.

Anyway, you're abslolutely right, my friend. Most of the people who look at the statistics, the past, the candlesticks, will end up losing money.

Most of these people are speacking in the present tense by looking at something that doesn't exist anymore.

Like : "There is an uptrend" instead of "There has been an uptrend".

It tooks my years and years to solve that problem.

Losers look left, winners look right.

Training our brain to evolve and switch to the model of looking right instead of looking left is pretty difficult.

Mostly for the elderly. Their mental structure will not move at all... or very hardly.

Those who still have a trained cerebral plasticity can start to train to almost never look at the statisitics but to create a game in the game.

So, the necessary skills are no longer mathematics skills and programming skills but rather game theory skills and biomimicry knowledges.

I used to work on these models which use the Future and not the past for several years.

For sure, I will not end up loosing.

Mainly because i do not undergo the events anymore, it's me who create them.

Once again, you're absolutely right, most of the models based on the past are a bottomless pit.

We must evolve into models which are based on the Future, if we want end up winning money on the Foreign Exchange Battlefield...

 

[new_trader]

“The further you look into the past, the further you can see into the future” — Winston Churchill.

This applies to markets as well because there are precedents that can be used to formulate a conclusion about a future movement.

"There is an uptrend" ---> "what did the market do after a similar uptrend in the past?"

 

[Pure Pip Producer]

“The further you look into the past, the further you can see into the future” — Winston Churchill.

This applies to markets as well because there are precedents that can be used to formulate a conclusion about a future movement.

"There is an uptrend" ---> "what did the market do after a similar uptrend in the past?"

Well... I would love to see a Winston Churchill forex track-record.

But you are right, we can probably win a little bit of money sometime by looking at the past.

But actually, most of the equity curves of those who look at the past cannot be consistent because they are dependent on the occurrence of events.

Their equity curves draw a roller-coaster ride.

They cannot be sure to earn money in equal period of time.

The constitency/regularity can be achieved only if we understand how we can extract ourselves from the occurence of events.

Getting out of this dependence allows us to draw a very stable equity curve.

Or, how would say Mark Douglas : "Broken through the threshold of consistency".

 

[tomorton]

Well... I would love to see a Winston Churchill forex track-record.

But you are right, we can probably win a little bit of money sometime by looking at the past.

But actually, most of the equity curves of those who look at the past cannot be consistent because they are dependent on the occurrence of events.

Their equity curves draw a roller-coaster ride.

They cannot be sure to earn money in equal period of time.

The constitency/regularity can be achieved only if we understand how we can extract ourselves from the occurence of events.

Getting out of this dependence allows us to draw a very stable equity curve.

Or, how would say Mark Douglas : "Broken through the threshold of consistency".

This an interesting viewpoint and certainly outside the run f the mill TA-based approach normally seen and used by the majority of traders. Perhaps you might say a bit more please about your approach to trading?

 

[new_trader]

But actually, most of the equity curves of those who look at the past cannot be consistent because they are dependent on the occurrence of events.

Actually they are dependent on drawing the correct conclusion about the upcoming event, and keep losses to a minimum if their conclusion proves to be incorrect. A trader should be continually asking themselves probing questions..."is this accumulation?"..."is this distribution?"..."is it more likely for the market to breakout of this range or breakdown?" Without studying the past, the trader is just taking a stab in the dark. This process is not rigid and can be thought of as Bayesian inference. I also like to compare it to the if/then/else conditional statements in programming.

 

[Pure Pip Producer]

Actually they are dependent on drawing the correct conclusion about the upcoming event, and keep losses to a minimum if their conclusion proves to be incorrect. A trader should be continually asking themselves probing questions..."is this accumulation?"..."is this distribution?"..."is it more likely for the market to breakout of this range or breakdown?" Without studying the past, the trader is just taking a stab in the dark. This process is not rigid and can be thought of as Bayesian inference. I also like to compare it to the if/then/else conditional statements in programming.

The main problem with this approach (which is the approach of 99% of the traders) is that we are (and i was also for many years) dependant of the occurrence of events. That’s why i changed. I have developped a new concept where the question is not about random or not random. And i have really better results with my new approach than with the normal/technical approach you just described.

This an interesting viewpoint and certainly outside the run f the mill TA-based approach normally seen and used by the majority of traders. Perhaps you might say a bit more please about your approach to trading?

There is datas in the Future but people prefer to laugh at me when i explain that... : https://www.trade2win.com/threads/monté-carlo-simulation-projection.238543/post-3165186

They will not laugh for long time i think..

Well... unfortunately, i cannot say a lot of things about my works these last years. Most of my new concepts are confidential. Anyway, everybody can follow my trading journal if they have a Darwinex account. No needed to deposit money! But to have the access to all the trading journal we must suscribe to Darwinex. If not, the people have only access to a simple and unique web page where there is only little informations about the kind of trading i developp.

 

[FXX]

Actually they are dependent on drawing the correct conclusion about the upcoming event, and keep losses to a minimum if their conclusion proves to be incorrect. A trader should be continually asking themselves probing questions..."is this accumulation?"..."is this distribution?"..."is it more likely for the market to breakout of this range or breakdown?" Without studying the past, the trader is just taking a stab in the dark. This process is not rigid and can be thought of as Bayesian inference. I also like to compare it to the if/then/else conditional statements in programming.

a trader is taking a stab in the dark studying past events and applying the outcome of what is really a complex mix of numerous variables driving sentiment. For it to be true and valid besides just guessing, it would require the same circumstances to be in play which we all know isn't the case. So how is looking at the past to predict the future anything but a guess.

 

[tomorton]

The main problem with this approach (which is the approach of 99% of the traders) is that we are (and i was also for many years) dependant of the occurrence of events. That’s why i changed. I have developped a new concept where the question is not about random or not random. And i have really better results with my new approach than with the normal/technical approach you just described.



There is datas in the Future but people prefer to laugh at me when i explain that... : https://www.trade2win.com/threads/monté-carlo-simulation-projection.238543/post-3165186

They will not laugh for long time i think..

Well... unfortunately, i cannot say a lot of things about my works these last years. Most of my new concepts are confidential. Anyway, everybody can follow my trading journal if they have a Darwinex account. No needed to deposit money! But to have the access to all the trading journal we must suscribe to Darwinex. If not, the people have only access to a simple and unique web page where there is only little informations about the kind of trading i developp.

Thank you for the reply. I went to the thread linked in your post but it seems to simply repeat what you have already said - that failure in trading is the usual result for traders who rely on historic price behaviour. So that's not really explaining anything.

Well, you are not obliged to anyone to reveal the details of your methodology. But I only hoped to hear about the basic principles. What are these then please?

 

[Pure Pip Producer]

But I only hoped to hear about the basic principles. What are these then please?

I have 3 basic principles. These 3 principles form a category i called the "Qual Trading" in oppositon to the "Quant trading" (I didn't invent this expression, it comes from Nassim Nicholas Taleb).

1) The Biomimicry (The foundations of reflection are based on biomimicry. A trading system is considered as an animal which is alive. The trading isn't binary anymore. The trading is animal).

2) Game Theory (From the point of view of the creator of the game and not from the point of view of the player. We mustn't solve problems anymore we must create problems to the price movements. Overturn the table. Fear must change sides).

3) The Time (We must create windows of time in order to control the Time).

 

[tomorton]

I have 3 basic principles. These 3 principles form a category i called the "Qual Trading" in oppositon to the "Quant trading" (I didn't invent this expression, it comes from Nassim Nicholas Taleb).

1) The Biomimicry (The foundations of reflection are based on biomimicry. A trading system is considered as an animal which is alive. The trading isn't binary anymore. The trading is animal).

2) Game Theory (From the point of view of the creator of the game and not from the point of view of the player. We mustn't solve problems anymore we must create problems to the price movements. Overturn the table. Fear must change sides).

3) The Time (We must create windows of time in order to control the Time).

Thank you.

 

[new_trader]

a trader is taking a stab in the dark studying past events and applying the outcome of what is really a complex mix of numerous variables driving sentiment. For it to be true and valid besides just guessing, it would require the same circumstances to be in play which we all know isn't the case. So how is looking at the past to predict the future anything but a guess.

I was referring specifically to price action. The idea that you can’t use past price action to determine possible future price action is simply and categorically false. That would be like saying all the buyers of a market now will not exist in future, therefore that latent supply can never have an effect on the market.

 

[FXX]

I was referring specifically to price action. The idea that you can’t use past price action to determine possible future price action is simply and categorically false. That would be like saying all the buyers of a market now will not exist in future, therefore that latent supply can never have an effect on the market.

As was I

We all know price action comes with no guarantees and you can find as many failed as you do successful. In fact you can find similar structures you find in price action in other timeline datasets. This includes birth rates, animal migrations, pollution levels, and even sun cycle data. My point is, you say without it you are stabbing in the dark when in fact it is nothing more than an educated guess - a stab in the dark. To remove the stab in the dark clause you would have to remove probability.