Any studies to back up the above?
NO it is not !!
With gambling you get better odds
Lol, good one…
Not that I’m aware of but if you sit down at a poker table with Phil Helmuth I bet my forex accout I know which one of you would win.
yes it’s not, no it is, yes it’s not, no it is. LOL
I am afraid you have taken part of my comments out of text, and have misrepresented my intention completely. Please don’t do that.
You quoted from my context
Then you said
When if you would have continued my quote, I went on to explain, that the use of Random - in this discussion is a MISUSE of the word – the market cannot and does not pop up at random prices therefore, I believe I said that in any theory either for or against (i am not taking sides) cannot use the word random in the description, because the market in FACT is NOT random.
After today I really doubt that is possible to make money thought technical only, I saw 100 or pips moves in 15 seconds or that could break thought any SL point.
Fundamental is something different but technical alone… and I think most if the bank and possessional trades relay more on fundamental analyse.
These is how I feel after 2 days of losses.
That’s called NFP (non farm payrol) first friday of every month. No one who knows what they are doing trades the NFP.
Dale was right, this thread has been entertaining !
That’s enough for me though, been off the past 3 weeks, enough goofing off, next week back to serious trading.
so long and thanks for all the fish
I’m keeping score:
Is Forex Gambling? — 17 pages, 163 posts, thread CLOSED
Is Forex Random? (a.k.a. It’s impossible…) — 9 pages, 91 posts (92 now) AND COUNTING
C’mon, guys, this is no time to slack off!
I think the correct terminology would be to say… The DIRECTION of the next market movement is RANDOM…it could go up, it could go down or it could just stay where it is. There are only 3 possible scenarios
it only goes two ways. There’s no real “staying where it is”.
But depending upon extremes, where it is, it will be back. Maybe today, maybe a year from now… So the question becomes one of timing and momentum.
It IS possible with a high degree of success, to pick the direction. The problem most have, is waiting on the best points of entry in that given direction.
A chart is chock full of clues. We are trying to make the highest probability wager on a market move based on history. The only advantage we have, is that history DOES repeat itself in the market. And it does so quite often.
Ok - thanks, Now we have determined that the market is not random as defined by price can appear anywhere at any time - - - however now the question on the table is a random up or down or even sideways movement - this is entirely a whole different topic.
I tend to agree with you, note I said tend to agree - by defintion, for the most part , yes the market will either go up or go down - - as MasterTang said - it isn’t going sideways - – again we need to define all of that.
In the sense that the price goes from 1.5555 to 1.5556 to 1.5554 to 1.5555 to 1.5556 to 1.5554 etc. . for a full 5 minute bar. well it could happen but not likely. (but if it did move 1-2 pip in a 5 minute bar it is strange? I dunno I never thought to look but I doubt it happens much, I’d bet on a 5 minute bar there is at least a 3 pip movement either up down or a combination - agian a useless fact but it can be proven right or wrong.)
On a 1 minute bar - yes it can go sideways. but lets say on 5 minute and above- the market cannot truly go sideways. Agree or disagree?
Definition of sideways - the price remains within 1-2 pips of the open price- then I will say that 80% or more of 1 minute bars are classified as Moving (not sideways).
then I will say that 99% or more of 5 minute bars are classified as Moving.
then I will say that 99.7% or more of 15 minute bars.
etc.
. .
.
Else please provide me with your definition of sideways and we’ll work with it - - But please be reasonable.
Hello,
Well yeh ‘TalonD’: it’s not QUITE as entertaining as I thought it would become (although it’s not ‘done’ yet I’m sure)!!! LOL!!!
It’s (the thread) taken some ‘twists and turns’ and there’s been some interesting theories postulated and some interesting interaction too. The only thing I’ve not quite been able to figure out is whether or not the ‘It’s impossible…’ was meant to be a statement of fact or a question???
Anyway: let’s see where it goes.
Regards.
Dale.
Hey Matt,
How’re you doing??? Every time I use / think about ‘Turtle Soup’ and ‘Turtle Soup Plus One’ I think of you for some strange reason!!! I’ve been TRYING to use them on the indices this past week but they’ve ‘chopped’ me nicely i.e. beautiful entries with low risk but never moved down enough to start trailing a profitable stop. But I’m waiting VERY patiently for them to ‘come my way’ and one of my trading systems will ‘catch the fall’!!! LOL!!!
As far as threads go: there’e another one in the ‘Newbie Island’ forum that’s got great entertainment potential (‘A winner on every trade? …’). Perhaps you should add that one to your ‘list’ ‘Clint’!!! LOL!!!
I must say though: there seems to be an inordinate number of new members and threads (since the beginning of the year) that purport to be doing REAL well and know all the ‘secrets’ but ‘don’t want to post because it’ll give the game away’. A bit strange to me!!!
Anyway: you have a good year my good man!!!
Regards,
Dale.
Roulette is a game of complete information. Pick a bet and math will tell you what your expectation is.
Forex is not a game of complete information. No mathematical formalism can tell you exactly what your outcome is precisely. Since such a tool doesnt exist, you cant implement a perfect trading algorithm and thus everyone can find opportunities to beat the field, whether by luck or experience or whatever it is theyve got.
With these points being established, you compare apples to bananas which invalidates your point.
Market researchers can not prove something, only a mathematically sound argument can proof something being a random walk. all those guys do is draw data up that tries to make it look like something behaves like a random walk. Even if that data was correct and precise and they had much of it, it would only be accurate to a certain degree but never precise.
I was going to leave this one alone but it’s still the weekend so one last post.
Dale you mentioned turtle soup. Which reminds me my uncle used to go down to the south Georgia swamps (Okeefenokee) way down upon the Suwanee River far far away.
YouTube - PAUL ROBESON-OLD FOLKS AT HOME-WAY DOWN UPON THE SWANEE.wmv
He would catch snapping turtles and make turtle soup. That was before I was born so I never had any but I hear it was good.
On the effieciencey of markets: here is a little paragraph I copied from somewhere.
An issue that is the subject of intense debate among academics and financial professionals is the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH). The Efficient Market Hypothesis states that at any given time, security prices fully reflect all available information. The implications of the efficient market hypothesis are truly profound. Most individuals that buy and sell securities (stocks in particular), do so under the assumption that the securities they are buying are worth more than the price that they are paying, while securities that they are selling are worth less than the selling price. But if markets are efficient and current prices fully reflect all information, then buying and selling securities in an attempt to outperform the market will effectively be a game of chance rather than skill.
Evidence that security (forex) prices do not fully reflect all available information 100% of the time was mentioned in a previous post when someone mentioned the big spike on Friday. The NFP spike happens reliably every first Friday of each month. You can predict it will occur with a high degree of certainty This shows two things, that the report is not pre factored into prices and that you can predict something about the market which proves it is not entirely random.
Also concerning randomness. One task I had at work is to creat a series of random numbers so I programed a random number algorithm. That set of numbers are pseudo random. Which shows that something can appear random and have all the characteristics of randomeness such as even distribution and yet not actually be random.
Check out these numbers they look random. Can you find the pattern? I’ll give you all time to guess and give the answer in the next post.
208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481 117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128475648233 786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648213393607260249141273724587006 606315588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548820466521384146 951941511609433057270365759591953092186117381932611793105118548074462379962749 567351885752724891227938183011949129833673362440656643086021394946395224737190…
Threads like this are entertaining but pointless as everyone already has their minds made up. What a boring world it would be if everyone could agree on everything eh?
Oh GREAT!
Now I wont get a THING done this weekend!
Interesting that the number 7 is the only one not to appear next to itself.
And the number 5 is the only one to appear three times in a row…
give up yet? ok here’s the answer. it’s some of the digits of PI. I didn’t include the first digits .1415926… figured someone might recognize those…
Here’s a good puzzler for you. Quick! what’s the last digit of PI ?
Trick question, there isn’t one, it’s infinite!
Thanks.
Now I can go do something productive.
I think technical analysis can help us take Pi to the last digit.
And there’s a one in 10 chance it ends with a 4.
[B]I could sure go for about 3.141592654 slices of — [/B]PECAN π[B] — right about now.[/B]