Whenever you feel that the market failed you!!!
Look at it from my view!!
You failed me
Look at it from my view!!
You failed me
- #11,343
- Oct 30, 2014 11:52pm Oct 30, 2014 11:52pm
- | Additional Username | Joined May 2011 | 223 Posts
Following on from this post (http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?p=7830420#post7830420), it seems safe to assume that the probability of returning to (aka "resolving") a potential TZ within h bars to the right of the middle bar is almost 80%, if h is set such that 3% of all the bars contain full TZs. But what about the probability of returning to a bar that isn't a PTZ (potential TZ bar)? In other words, a current bar that is h-left-recurrent, and that might stay that way (only h-left-recurrent), or might become h-fully-recurrent?...
{quote} Ow, thank you very much mate. Now i know that +/- k must be used in different situation (not at same candle), depend on sell/buy opportunity. And we must prepare our selved for "failed" signal, may be using stop loss, averaging/martingale can solve this. Thanks for nice post mate.
I have a different understanding. Let's look at some statements by Eurusdd.
"Now, if you get the h and k right, you will find that transient price-zone occur with very LOW -probability. That is PRICES are h-recurrent almost-surely for some positive h." (PRICES not BARS/CANDLES)
There is no center bar
Only -h and +h (this EureKa literally just became aware to me as I write this so thanks for the question)"If your h is right, this probability should be about 3%. That is 97% of the time, at least one of the next h bars should hit p." Eurusdd...
Now how do you avoid a 3% probable transient zone? You treat all potential TZs (k) as completed TZs and avoid them by taking revisit trades in the "almost sure" recurrent zones above ( +k ) or below ( -K ) the assumed completed TZ.
- #11,344
- Oct 31, 2014 12:20am Oct 31, 2014 12:20am
- | Membership Revoked | Joined Oct 2012 | 2,254 Posts
{quote} {quote} I have a different understanding. Let's look at some statements by Eurusdd. "Now, if you get the h and k right, you will find that transient price-zone occur with very LOW -probability. That is PRICES are h-recurrent almost-surely for some positive h." (PRICES not BARS/CANDLES) There is no center bar
Prices are 97%+ h-recurrent for the right h. This means that every-time a price is hit, there is 97% chance it will be h-recurrent. so if the last time it was not h-recurrent, it has 97% chance to be h-recurrent now. it is not the bars, you should count for the probability. focus on price!!!
Less than 3% of prices will not be h-recurrent for some minimum h.
For example, go back. if you find a price which is not 5-recurrent, go into the future where a bar went through it again, it most likely will be 5-recurrent this time!
Now, if you look at all the times a bar went through that price, the probability will approach 1 almost surely that the price will be h-recurrent!
SORRY I JUST HAD TO CLEAR THIS SO I LEAVE NO CONFUSION BEHIND!!!!
- #11,345
- Oct 31, 2014 12:34am Oct 31, 2014 12:34am
- | Additional Username | Joined May 2011 | 223 Posts
{quote}YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON who really got the idea so far!!! I see a lot of people disputing facts! Prices are 97%+ h-recurrent for the right h. This means that every-time a price is hit, there is 97% chance it will be h-recurrent. so if the last time it was not h-recurrent, it has 97% chance to be h-recurrent now. it is not the bars, you should count for the probability. focus on price!!! Less than 3% of prices will not be h-recurrent for some minimum h. For example, go back. if you find a price which is not 5-recurrent, go into the future...
Muchas Gracious!!!!!!
- #11,346
- Oct 31, 2014 12:53am Oct 31, 2014 12:53am
- | Additional Username | Joined Oct 2014 | 77 Posts
{quote}YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON who really got the idea so far!!! I see a lot of people disputing facts! Prices are 97%+ h-recurrent for the right h. This means that every-time a price is hit, there is 97% chance it will be h-recurrent. so if the last time it was not h-recurrent, it has 97% chance to be h-recurrent now. it is not the bars, you should count for the probability. focus on price!!! Less than 3% of prices will not be h-recurrent for some minimum h. For example, go back. if you find a price which is not 5-recurrent, go into the future...
like a chart - #11,347
- Oct 31, 2014 12:58am Oct 31, 2014 12:58am
- | Additional Username | Joined May 2013 | 724 Posts
{quote}YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON who really got the idea so far!!! I see a lot of people disputing facts! Prices are 97%+ h-recurrent for the right h. This means that every-time a price is hit, there is 97% chance it will be h-recurrent. so if the last time it was not h-recurrent, it has 97% chance to be h-recurrent now. it is not the bars, you should count for the probability. focus on price!!! Less than 3% of prices will not be h-recurrent for some minimum h. For example, go back. if you find a price which is not 5-recurrent,...
I want more brain power!
- #11,349
- Oct 31, 2014 1:21am Oct 31, 2014 1:21am
- | Membership Revoked | Joined May 2012 | 1,218 Posts
{quote} Yes, I was talking about bars, not pips (prices). Within the 21% of bars that don't get fully revisited, some of the pips within the bars will get revisited. So the probability of individual prices getting revisited is higher than the probability of all the prices within the bars getting revisited. Next job for me is to work out some probabilities based on pips, not bars. Thanks!
maybe increasing or decreasing percentage of price movement... because probability is percentage measurement
For all visual learners out there &/or lazy asses that want their pips served on silver plate, here's what Eurusdd is saying in his last post.
Check it out and thank me later ( eventhough I'm pretty sure you won't, you're way to busy figuring out how I'm faking my real results, no?
)
I want to make it clear that this is NOT how I trade this concept, but the idea did start from here. This was the initial proposition, but I decided to to tweak it and make it work my way. If you managed to check my previous contributions, you would have realized by now what I'm doing (but I understand that you don't have time on your hands, so no worries )
So here goes:
1- I chose H=39 because on that particular TF & currency, that's the minimum H needed to have less than 3% TZ (those are rough figures for the sake of the example, more analysis is needed here)
2- You see on the first red arrow to the left that there is a confirmed TZ. There's a 3% probability for that to happen, yet it happened.
3- I extended the confirmed TZ area with light blue horizontal lines
4- You see the red circle? Great. Forget the right of the red circle. Given the red circle and the left hand side before it, can you realize that this is a new PTZ area? You should! If not then move on to the next thread.
5- What is being said & proposed is that the prices inside this circle will be revisited in the next 39 Hours (bars) with a 97% probability.
6- Do you feel bad for not being able to grasp this simple concept eventhough you've been reading this thread forever (2 hours maybe?) .
Well, don't be to sad, I will give you tons of examples where this didn't work out. After all 3% of thousands of bars is still a large number, no?
7- Reminder: I don't use this way of trading TZ & probability! Eurusdd is saying to focus on price, I tend to focus on bars.
Cheers! Don't party too hard.
Jay
Check it out and thank me later ( eventhough I'm pretty sure you won't, you're way to busy figuring out how I'm faking my real results, no?
)I want to make it clear that this is NOT how I trade this concept, but the idea did start from here. This was the initial proposition, but I decided to to tweak it and make it work my way. If you managed to check my previous contributions, you would have realized by now what I'm doing (but I understand that you don't have time on your hands, so no worries
) So here goes:
1- I chose H=39 because on that particular TF & currency, that's the minimum H needed to have less than 3% TZ (those are rough figures for the sake of the example, more analysis is needed here)
2- You see on the first red arrow to the left that there is a confirmed TZ. There's a 3% probability for that to happen, yet it happened.
3- I extended the confirmed TZ area with light blue horizontal lines
4- You see the red circle? Great. Forget the right of the red circle. Given the red circle and the left hand side before it, can you realize that this is a new PTZ area? You should! If not then move on to the next thread.
5- What is being said & proposed is that the prices inside this circle will be revisited in the next 39 Hours (bars) with a 97% probability.
6- Do you feel bad for not being able to grasp this simple concept eventhough you've been reading this thread forever (2 hours maybe?
) .Well, don't be to sad, I will give you tons of examples where this didn't work out. After all 3% of thousands of bars is still a large number, no?
7- Reminder: I don't use this way of trading TZ & probability! Eurusdd is saying to focus on price, I tend to focus on bars.
Cheers! Don't party too hard.
Jay
For all visual learners out there &/or lazy asses that want their pips served on silver plate, here's what Eurusdd is saying in his last post. Check it out and thank me later ( eventhough I'm pretty sure you won't, you're way to busy figuring out how I'm faking my real results, no?
HUGE THUMBS UP
THANK yOU
- #11,353
- Oct 31, 2014 3:30am Oct 31, 2014 3:30am
- | Membership Revoked | Joined May 2012 | 1,218 Posts
For all visual learners out there &/or lazy asses that want their pips served on silver plate, here's what Eurusdd is saying in his last post. Check it out and thank me later ( eventhough I'm pretty sure you won't, you're way to busy figuring out how I'm faking my real results, no?
- #11,354
- Oct 31, 2014 3:36am Oct 31, 2014 3:36am
- Joined Jul 2009 | Status: Left Leg In, Right Leg Out! | 5,792 Posts
A pip is only worth it if you know how much you risked to earn it
For all visual learners out there &/or lazy asses that want their pips served on silver plate, here's what Eurusdd is saying in his last post. Check it out and thank me later ( eventhough I'm pretty sure you won't, you're way to busy figuring out how I'm faking my real results, no?
Before getting too excited, I think it's only fair to show you the other side of the picture.
I hope the below example shows you why this is far from being a Holy Grail & that it doesn't work by itself.
For those who don't see it clearly, in this example if you wanted to take it as it is, you would have risked a DD of 60 pips for the sake of a 5 pip scalp, and then end up leaving the trade with a confirmed -50 pip. It sucks doesn't it?
That's why I don't use this technique, and I warned you not to party too hard
I hope the below example shows you why this is far from being a Holy Grail & that it doesn't work by itself.
For those who don't see it clearly, in this example if you wanted to take it as it is, you would have risked a DD of 60 pips for the sake of a 5 pip scalp, and then end up leaving the trade with a confirmed -50 pip. It sucks doesn't it?
That's why I don't use this technique, and I warned you not to party too hard
- #11,360
- Oct 31, 2014 4:19am Oct 31, 2014 4:19am
{quote}
We Win Some, We Loose Some, But Let your Win Rates be More to be Successful