the hare
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,944
- Likes
- 1,282
What interesting conclusions you draw. Thats the sort of thinking that led ornithologists to conclude all swans where white![]()
By the way belflan, the answer you gave was 100% correct
What interesting conclusions you draw. Thats the sort of thinking that led ornithologists to conclude all swans where white![]()
Not my conclusion, but that of ASC. I do agree with him, obviously.What interesting conclusions you draw. Thats the sort of thinking that led ornithologists to conclude all swans where white![]()
And indeed, all swans were white until they discovered the black ones.
These events are always rationalised in retrospect as if they could have been predicted. Like you posting something of interest. It hasn’t happened yet, but that doesn’t mean it won’t ever happen. And when it does, we can all sagely nod and agree we knew it would happen sooner or later. The potential was always there. As it is for all things. I think ‘all is known in advance’ was a misunderstanding (and clearly a phrase too far after the vanilla options debacle) of how things really are, as it should surely have been, anything and everything is expected, but we don’t know where or when.
Of course I really meant to say that.Please tell me you didnt really mean to say that
By the way belflan, the answer you gave was 100% correctand the equity curve below is the sort of thing you'd typically get when you rectify that particular problem
![]()
I just assumed Bunny had been eating field mushrooms again.Interestingly, belfan did'nt give an answer. So would you like inform us of the answer ...or shall I ?![]()
Interestingly, belfan did'nt give an answer. So would you like inform us of the answer ...or shall I ?![]()
There’s a reasonable argument to challenge sentient life existing on this planet, but this is neither the time nor the place.
Actually he did give an answer, but in private through the rep system.
I know. This is the answer I was refering to.
Its not my thread but I'm sure any contributions would be welcome (where it my thread I'd be hoping for lulz and piccies of decent looking totty)
I'm only posting to defend the reputation of random systems, and to provide a bit of balance to the usual crap that you need tight stops, massive targets and a 95% strike rate to earn a crust.
Don't use your fixation with me as an excuse not to do something. There's absolutely no logic in the connection you're trying to build.If bramble wasnt such a bleedin nuicence I'd post some lovely 3D charts of trade duration v theoretical win rate, v volatility and people might learn something worth knowing. A lot of this stuff changes as you start introducing more complexity into the model, but you have to start somewhere.
Well hold on my old son...
If you get 20 setups...trade 'em.
If you get just two...trade 'em.
That's the point.
Takes as much skill (more?) to avoid hitting trades you shouldn't as it does to hit the ones you should.
Number of trades aren't the issue. Quality of trade is.
RANDOMIZATION SYSTEM
Hi everyone and anyone, I am developing a system based on Randomisation where you place 2 orders in the market at a certain level and aim to capture a small amount. Has anyone tried anything like this before?
The results so far are amazing!