Over There but Here, Reading Randomness

[gizmotron2]

It's probably best to put this somewhere so as not to disrupt other threads.

[gizmotron2]

So Let's start this off right with some music. I was introduced to this girl when she was a teenager on her way to The Berklee College of Music by her father that I knew back then.

link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=5KGe_X77k0E

[Still]

Great musicianship. 

Here's what I believe I understand about your method. 

It aims to follow a trend best identified as multiple single appearances on one side of an EC bet.   You look at at least six EC streams to try and see the desired pattern, increasing the chances of seeing it.  By waiting for what might be a single going against the trend to get into the trend, it's a lot like what stock market traders do when they wait for a pullback to hopefully get into a trend. Once you start betting, you might hit the trend one, two or three times depending how strong the trend seems.  People have pointed out the problems with this but you've posted charts showing the trend in your own capital account that seems legit.  Two of the problems being how do you know when a trend starts and stops so you can take a profitable bite out of the middle of it.  Then there's money management with seven stacks of $5 chips at $100 per stack.  The stats are interesting where a high enough strike rate overcomes occasional seven bank losses to provide a profit factor of, what, 2:1?

Have I missed anything? Not sure I understand where groupings of 12 come in, besides the six EC bet streams you look at.

[gizmotron2]

Great musicianship. 

Here's what I believe I understand about your method. 

It aims to follow a trend best identified as multiple single appearances on one side of an EC bet.   You look at at least six EC streams to try and see the desired pattern, increasing the chances of seeing it.  By waiting for what might be a single going against the trend to get into the trend, it's a lot like what stock market traders do when they wait for a pullback to hopefully get into a trend. Once you start betting, you might hit the trend one, two or three times depending how strong the trend seems.  People have pointed out the problems with this but you've posted charts showing the trend in your own capital account that seems legit.  Two of the problems being how do you know when a trend starts and stops so you can take a profitable bite out of the middle of it.  Then there's money management with seven stacks of $5 chips at $100 per stack.  The stats are interesting where a high enough strike rate overcomes occasional seven bank losses to provide a profit factor of, what, 2:1?

Have I missed anything? Not sure I understand where groupings of 12 come in, besides the six EC bet streams you look at.

Very close. The three net wins as a stop point is important. You need 2.33 session wins to break even with a seven net loss. I'm getting 4.66 sessions or better on average for each lost session. That's where the 2:1 comes from.

There are 6 groups. There are 12 sets, A / B, that make up each of the six groups of an Even Chance groupings. Example: one set of reds, one set of blacks = the red / black group.

You never know if you are in the middle or the end. It's a guess. But the most important aspect of the method is the difficulty of the session. Sometimes it's an easy win. Other times it's getting you nowhere. And some sessions swarm with first try losses as a streak. I virtual bet on first losses. They might be indicators of a streak of losses. You search for easy stretches of the session. You must use situational awareness in combination with trend identification.

I haven't showed this there yet because it is an advanced concept to look for. The size of trends swarm too. Micro trends often come in 4 or 5 spins and then they change to something else. You can get good at taking one win from micro trends or patterns.

I used the bigger concept of seeing singles on the weak side just to make sure everyone could see them in the charts. I make all my money on the ubiquitous mini trends or patterns when they swarm all over the charts. It's a very important characteristic. The size of trends tend to swarm at times. This is why you see me leave a win streak and go somewhere else looking for a new trend to bet.

Hunting the giant win streak has been my weakness for years. It's easy to side step a bad streak, to chug along slowly thru an even patch, but it's even easier to chip away at the sides of the mini characteristics too.

[luckyfella]

Incorporate multi-timeframe perspective adapted from trading and you get the big picture.

[luckyfella]

So here is my comment. You are on the right track. That's good.

However, identify every single thing that's a stumbling block to you. What is it that you can't know because of [whatever].

Write it down. It's very important you record each and every one of them down. This way you have a proper record that you can refer to of what you don't know now.

What you don't know or impossible to know is due to the limitation of your knowledge today. As you keep on this topic and now have proper record to focus on what you don't know, someday your subconcious mind may reveal the answer to you.

For someone who went very deep into the rabbit hole, I can tell you the boundaries of knowledge is much larger than what you read on forums or books or watch on youtube videos.

Understand that this is a journey where each one of us is at different locations of the path. Our location is the summation of our current knowledge and that keeps progressing at whatever rate and this growth rate rises as we learn more of the terrain.

Btw, I have 3decades of experience in this industry of directional trading.

Sadhguru said it this way,
Focus on it and the secrets of the universe will yield to you.

[luckyfella]

You never know if you are in the middle or the end. It's a guess.

You never know because you have not yet learnt to identify the start of new trends. Keep on at it, another day in the future when you learn this knowledge this post you write today won't apply to you anymore.

Hunting the giant win streak has been my weakness for years.

Assume you have the knowledge to accurately pinpoint new trends, will you be hunting giant trends or small trends ?

We do what our knowledge and skill allow us. That's why it's important to create a journal of the things we don't know.

What we don't know is normal, there is always a limit.

What is damaging is to think we know when we actually don't know.

To know what we know and what we don't know, that's true knowledge. - Confucious

[gizmotron2]

Lucky,

I already know. I've been doing it right in front of you only you don't know what it is that I'm doing.

[gizmotron2]

So here is my comment. You are on the right track. That's good.

Spare me.

You are clueless and probably an annoyance that is best figured as a troll. So I guess this won't be discussed here because of you.

[gizmotron2]

Incorporate multi-timeframe perspective adapted from trading and you get the big picture.

Double talk, look it up.

[gizmotron2]

So here is my comment. You are on the right track. That's good.

However, identify every single thing that's a stumbling block to you. What is it that you can't know because of [whatever].

Write it down. It's very important you record each and every one of them down. This way you have a proper record that you can refer to of what you don't know now.

What you don't know or impossible to know is due to the limitation of your knowledge today. As you keep on this topic and now have proper record to focus on what you don't know, someday your subconcious mind may reveal the answer to you.

For someone who went very deep into the rabbit hole, I can tell you the boundaries of knowledge is much larger than what you read on forums or books or watch on youtube videos.

Understand that this is a journey where each one of us is at different locations of the path. Our location is the summation of our current knowledge and that keeps progressing at whatever rate and this growth rate rises as we learn more of the terrain.

Btw, I have 3decades of experience in this industry of directional trading.

Sadhguru said it this way,
Focus on it and the secrets of the universe will yield to you.

What a magical pile of horse crap.

[gizmotron2]

You never know because you have not yet learnt to identify the start of new trends. Keep on at it, another day in the future when you learn this knowledge this post you write today won't apply to you anymore.
Assume you have the knowledge to accurately pinpoint new trends, will you be hunting giant trends or small trends ?

We do what our knowledge and skill allow us. That's why it's important to create a journal of the things we don't know.

What we don't know is normal, there is always a limit.

What is damaging is to think we know when we actually don't know.

To know what we know and what we don't know, that's true knowledge. - Confucious

All Baloney, nice going.

[gizmotron2]

Hey Lucky,

You missed out. You are the forum wrecker here.

[Still]

Very close. The three net wins as a stop point is important. You need 2.33 session wins to break even with a seven net loss. I'm getting 4.66 sessions or better on average for each lost session. That's where the 2:1 comes from.

There are 6 groups. There are 12 sets, A / B, that make up each of the six groups of an Even Chance groupings. Example: one set of reds, one set of blacks = the red / black group.

You never know if you are in the middle or the end. It's a guess. But the most important aspect of the method is the difficulty of the session. Sometimes it's an easy win. Other times it's getting you nowhere. And some sessions swarm with first try losses as a streak. I virtual bet on first losses. They might be indicators of a streak of losses. You search for easy stretches of the session. You must use situational awareness in combination with trend identification.

I haven't showed this there yet because it is an advanced concept to look for. The size of trends swarm too. Micro trends often come in 4 or 5 spins and then they change to something else. You can get good at taking one win from micro trends or patterns.

I used the bigger concept of seeing singles on the weak side just to make sure everyone could see them in the charts. I make all my money on the ubiquitous mini trends or patterns when they swarm all over the charts. It's a very important characteristic. The size of trends tend to swarm at times. This is why you see me leave a win streak and go somewhere else looking for a new trend to bet.

Hunting the giant win streak has been my weakness for years. It's easy to side step a bad streak, to chug along slowly thru an even patch, but it's even easier to chip away at the sides of the mini characteristics too.

Hmm, i'm just wondering how this is not encoded somewhere given your advanced skills in coding.  I code too, and have to be very clear when explaining to the computer what i want it to do.  If i can do that, it's nice enough to spit back large amounts of data to tell me whether my rules have any merit.  If we are relying on human interpretation as it dances around some general rules of seeing patterns, then i am inclined to believe this is an unbeknownst reliance on precognition, as described in other threads here. I would suggest there are a lot of traders of markets who are actually getting by more on precognition then their actual rules. 

But as a rule, i'm in favor of following trends, and increasing bet size on the way up, decreasing on the way down.  I'm intrigued by the Chandelier Exit that may have been proven to work in random environments:

link:s://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/trading-investing/chandelier-exit/

I'm also looking at the idea of up as you go.  For example, we know that if you changed your R:R ratio to 2:1 you would have twice as many losses as wins in a random environment.  A 4:1 ratio would have more like 4x losses per win as one's account balance continues to break even. So why not use a 4:1 or higher ratio, and parlay, or add to winning positions at the 2x, and/or 3x marks. The number of wins will remain the same (about 25%), but now they will be bigger, finally moving the needle on one's account balance. 

I'm just not optimistic about my ability to "read" six streams of ECs without very clear rules, clear enough to feed to a computer (which is what the brain is?).   If i have to rely on precognition, i should just recognize that, and concentrate my efforts more directly on cultivating that.  Isn't this logical?

[Still]

So here is my comment. You are on the right track. That's good.

However, identify every single thing that's a stumbling block to you. What is it that you can't know because of [whatever].

Write it down. It's very important you record each and every one of them down. This way you have a proper record that you can refer to of what you don't know now.

What you don't know or impossible to know is due to the limitation of your knowledge today. As you keep on this topic and now have proper record to focus on what you don't know, someday your subconcious mind may reveal the answer to you.

For someone who went very deep into the rabbit hole, I can tell you the boundaries of knowledge is much larger than what you read on forums or books or watch on youtube videos.

Understand that this is a journey where each one of us is at different locations of the path. Our location is the summation of our current knowledge and that keeps progressing at whatever rate and this growth rate rises as we learn more of the terrain.

Btw, I have 3decades of experience in this industry of directional trading.

Sadhguru said it this way,
Focus on it and the secrets of the universe will yield to you.

Maybe you are aware that this method is semi-dependent on precognition, as described in other threads here?  If so, why not join those threads and expand the knowledge base there? Preferably by adding some empirical studies, or personal reports of success?

Indeed, knowledge is where its at, and it's a major problem when a mind thinks it knows when it does not.  If your mind was filled with knowledge, there would be no room for faith, which is responsible for all phenomenon that can be seen with the human eye.  With full knowledge you would not see planets, or stars or people.  All of these, which change, are faith based phenomenon.  Observation of faith based phenom is mistakenly taken for "knowledge" when in fact it is just the observation of persistent, albeit faith-based, phenomenon.  2 + 2 = 4 is the observation of a persistent phenomenon, but it is not base in knowledge.  What causes 2 +2 to equal 4 is a faith-based phenomenon. ( It's faith that makes a unified whole seem separable and divisible into things that can be enumerated.) 

Hope this helps delineate the realm of knowledge from the realm of faith, two diametrically apposed states of mind.