Menu
Sister Sites

Options

Bookmark Thread

First Page First Unread Last Page Last Post

Print Thread

Similar Threads

Technical Analysis Fallacy 63,555 replies

The Ultimate Fallacy in Technical Analysis 99 replies

"Technical Analysis Fallacy" thread people, I need your help 54 replies

Technical Analysis Fallacy Redux 23 replies

Attachments: Statistical analysis fallacy
Exit Attachments

Statistical analysis fallacy

Ugh,

I can tell this is going to be a pointless, endless argument.

Expectancy is not statistics. It is a basic, basic, very basic, fundamental idea of probability.

Making 20 pips with a stop of 40 has nothing to do with machine B. Machine B loses no matter what.

This is the fundamental problem, people thinking they can apply mathematical laws when obviously they are completely wrong.

Your model doesn't apply, and also, your reasoning is wrong. This is the problem I have said in my first post.

I will not respond any more to this thread.
Didn't realise we were having an argument.

I can now see that your intention from the beginning was to try to prove that you are intelligent and everyone else is stupid; Funny how that often works out in reverse plus exposes your obvious insecurity.

Go away and cry little man, you truely are thick and pathetic.
In the classic words of Rainer Wolfcastle, 'Get a room boys'.
The breaking of a wave cannot explain the whole sea.
Typical response.

Left the last message with a hook "I will not respond anymore to this thread", and
you responded the way I expected you to respond. Blindly defending your weak points, then a personal attack. That is your first lesson in "expectancy".

2nd lesson: I predicted how you would respond the best I could based on your previous posts. That is part psychology.

I basically just made a trade. And I came out on top. The risk? Not much. I had a tight stop. If I lost, you wouldn't have responded, I get nothing. Break even. The reward? You admitting loss and resulting to 95% of typical responses, and proving me right.

Congratulations on being on the opposite side of MY winning trade.

But I hate to do this, but its just too easy. You claim I am insecure when you yourself post your own profit/loss screenshot even though it had nothing to do with the argument.

My 2nd trade (lets see if we can keep this going): You have been trading for a very short time, you are in highschool (age 16?), and you had some horribly gone wrong experiment in the past. My guess is that you thought it involved statistics.

The risk? Nothing. There is no way for me to tell if you lie. The reward? If you actually do respond, it will confirm that you are indeed playing with Machine B. You want to pay more than the prize.

Now this isn't a hook: I am truly leaving this thread. I hope you got something out of this. Good luck on your trades.

And to anyone else reading this, you don't have to know anything at all about statistics to be a highly successful trader. All though you do need common sense.

"Common sense is uncommon"
Quoting loa1452
Typical response.

Left the last message with a hook "I will not respond anymore to this thread", and
you responded the way I expected you to respond. Blindly defending your weak points, then a personal attack. That is your first lesson in "expectancy".

2nd lesson: I predicted how you would respond the best I could based on your previous posts. That is part psychology.

I basically just made a trade. And I came out on top. The risk? Not much. I had a tight stop. If I lost, you wouldn't have responded, I get nothing. Break even. The reward?...
Lol, NO!!

You responded because you didnt come out on top and you wanted another go, lol.

Sad sad man.
Living the adventure in my head.
Quoting loa1452
The whole point is.. tdion, has absolutely no idea what statistics is or how it is used. And apparently his 'statistical type friends' are just as simplified.
If you are going to insult me, at least don't make grammatical errors. It should have been "tdion has absolutely no idea what statistics are nor how they are used."

i assume you think that i am a pea brain with pea brained friends? do me a favor: create the "correct" statistical approach for post #1.

i would have said (again, this is from a pea brain) that after a population size of 900 individual samples, the moving average cross has a positive expectancy. again, that is my dim witted college statistics background (along with my computer science bachelors and masters)

i could have shown distribution samples of each trade in a histogram, and done a Z score or null hypothesis with a 95% confidence interval, but there was no need to get that detailed.

but hey, i can't wait to see the right answer!
Oh geez. This is why I love forums. Pointless arguments, good laughs. I just have to come back to this one. The masses have come out of their holes, I just can't leave this thread.

Lets shoot down another one: Leonlorenzo is too easy. He/she just simply proved my previous posts.

As for tdion,
Quote
If you are going to insult me, at least don't made grammatical errors. It should have been "tdion has absolutely no idea what statistics are or how they are used."

Nope. It is "Statistics is". You are wrong.

You want me to create the correct statistical approach for post number 1? How about you re-read my posts? I don't claim to be a statistician, like I said. And I said it would be too complicated.

But hey, since you can punctuate correctly, I TOTALLY BELIEVE you went to college. (sarcasm). Anyone who has gone to college knows that college statistics is no more advanced than an AP highschool class. (This is assuming you live in America).

Oh but since you claim to be a computer nerd with a masters, you must be right and not me since I claimed to be a ... uh.. wait.. I didn't claim to be anything. You just feel that will validate your points?

You are right on one point though: I do agree that you are pea brained.

Please respond, this is just too fun. Its almost time to go to bed so make it quick.
Its because of hearing about fallacies like these that I have decided to trade only support and resistance---which works. I found out that even if indicator based system works, it will stop working at some point and need changes.
lets say for a given system
we can get a Win/loss of 60% L=loss, W= win
what is the chances of

LLW compared with LLLW.

some proponents suggest wait for 2 losses or more before putting in a position to get the probabilities on your side. Though the system would miss out a situation where u can get WWWW ie 4 wins in a row.

the prob of any trade would be 60% irrespective of prior wins or losses.
the odds of 3 losses in a row is around 6% yet the prob of the next trade to win is not 94% its still 60%.

Is this a fact of fallacy.

Basic question
is odds the same as probability.
Well that sucks.

I had a great idea for a post on statistical analysis as it applies to trading, but this thread is probably going to end up in the trashbin before I could get it done...
Quoting Darkstar
Well that sucks.

I had a great idea for a post on statistical analysis as it applies to trading, but this thread is probably going to end up in the trashbin before I could get it done...
If you'll notice, all of the bickering took place and ended Jan 22. Some random post by Fingobob bumped the thread, but I doubt it will get binned...
All I ask for is a chance to prove that money cannot make me happy.
Quoting Darkstar
Well that sucks.
I had a great idea for a post on statistical analysis...
why not post it in Scotty's thread Sir?
or PM it to me.. i love learning
1) are odds and probability the same?
2) how do we integrate statistics into trading?
3) what are the common pit falls of using statistics ? other than bias .

Hey Darkstar
How did the mentorship program go? i know it was quite a long time ago but it sounded like a "turtle" like program. Interesting to see how it went. Can PM me if u prefer not to put it on the forum
  • Post #34
  • Quote
  • Last Post: Mar 25, 2010 4:48pm Mar 25, 2010 4:48pm
Quoting tdion
Below is a graph of trades for the EURUSD over the past 8 years. One trade per day, based on the direction of an MA cross. (Remember, all the "experts" say trading dailys is "easier" )

What is the point?

The first half of the graph shows modest profit over the first 900+ trades.... the remaining 2/3 you would have lost your A$$.

HAHA all you forex statisticians out there.... explain WHY the algorithm failed even though the huge population of the first few years leads you to conclude (statistically) that this is a profitable/breakeven...
I suspect that the front end of the chart is as statistically irrelevant as the last 2/3, and you would be a fool to use a MA crossover to justify a trade. Just my guess.
0 traders viewing now