Trading systems can help us to underst cashbackforexpipcalculator the market to understand, forexcashbackprof cashback forexcalculator the same as to see the right There cashback forex profit calculator no system that can help us to see the right market, if in the development of the system, the hope is that through it to see the right (see the direction, do it and earn), in the development of the ideal system will never be developed, because this ideal is not reasonable to understand the market, what is the meaning? cashbackforexprofitcalculatort is to be able to have an analysis of the market in the past, to have a characterization of the present, to have a prediction of the future so that it is clear and clear, to be able to interact with the market in a certain logic, consistently, repeatedly and sustainably In fact, this goal is not difficult to achieve By this standard, successful traders, are those who have found a system that belongs to them, "read and understand The market is very complex, and it does not have standards of its own; it needs traders to set standards for it. Strictly speaking, the phrase "setting standards for the market" is inappropriate, because no one is in a position to dictate that the market should perform according to a certain standard, but one can set standards for oneself The standard of a certain type of volatility more trendy, another type of volatility called oscillation, a certain type of called bounce, a certain type of called retracement, and so on This standard is only meaningful to those who set it, and accept it for others, worthless For me, 1% of the wave is a miscellaneous wave, completely ignored, for short term traders, may have been enough to play N back in the end whose definition is right? The 1% alone, there is no right or wrong, unless each person behind a set of logical self-consistent system, based on this system, to examine the way it treats the 1%, in order to say right or wrong For example, there is a very classic trading commandment: do not do less than 3:1 profit-loss ratio of a single sentence is right, or wrong? Is it right or wrong, not simply from this sentence to see, to see it embedded in the system they belong to, is not reasonable on this sentence, my personal view that its right or wrong, depends on: the way to stop profit for example, I am taking a moving trailing stop to make the field, is a passive stop at the beginning of the position, I simply do not know where I will stop (but if you do it wrong, where the stop loss is clear Therefore, I cant evaluate the profit/loss ratio, so this sentence is meaningless to me. If another trader, who has active take profit settings, then he may refer to the previous pressure, support, to estimate the profit space, so he can come up with a profit/loss ratio and he has a corresponding system to guide himself to achieve this setting, then, this sentence is meaningful to him. For example, in "The Gift of the Ghost" there is a logic: as long as the market does not prove that I am right (no floating profit within the specified time), then I am wrong and I have to close my position. The ratio is relative, either enlarge the numerator or reduce the denominator. Long-term traders enlarge the numerator by holding still, while short term traders, whose own range of activity is very narrow, do not put much, so they must rely on shortening the time in the market, and thus control the volatility of the randomness, reducing the possibility of loss due to randomness. Strategy for me, just the opposite: as long as the market does not prove me wrong, then I am still right my logic that the market is volatile, volatility is character, this character may be slow, may also be rapid, not counting which, as long as it is within a reasonable range, are normal, if the species is normal, then we must tolerate the normal of others, do not own the wind, become not Normal turtles actually take a similar line of thought, leaving 2N to you, fluctuate go! This is to draw a circle for it, you in the circle, I do not care, if you want to get out of the circle, it must be wrong, I do not want you from the above two examples, regardless of the specific settings (3:1) or fuzzy strategy (how to count right), are not just say, out of the trading system, or trading system behind the logic system, are meaningless again, read the market, not to see the right We developed the traffic light, which is itself a trading system-like thing. The traffic light cant completely eliminate car accidents, can it? But it can provide a basis for the decision of "can I cross the road now", or the signal and once a car accident occurs, it can also be based on the traffic light to determine who is at fault and who is responsible for it. is not the truth of the matter, but a byproduct of my eyes because I wear them Did I know this? I know, I know I see a yellow world, the world of yellow, is my artificial illusion but, I still want to wear, why? Anti-blue light ah, can protect the eyes Similarly, I came up with a set of trend trading system, set on the price fluctuations, it is the same as wearing a pair of glasses under the filter of this system, some of the market was omitted by me to see, some were refined, the focus to see some of the market, caused me harm, so that I lost money if I do not use this system, may have been omitted in the market, but also to make money, or even In the market that will lose money also safe, of course, there may miss the opportunity to make money, or even because of doing the opposite direction, and big losses this system is like glasses glasses in the anti-blue light at the same time, but also polluted my vision system in helping me to make money at the same time, but also solidified my perspective and position on the market observation, limiting what we can see from the market, I can only read the information processed by the system, to get the limitations the conclusion of the lesser of two evils I do the math, I think the eye is more cost-effective, so, rather accept the glasses Similarly, with the assistance of the system, I was restricted and liberated, but also earned money, which is enough If someone is not satisfied and wants to pursue the absolute truth, I think its going to be bad because, the yellow glasses are only the second illusion, the first illusion, where does it come from? Because our human eye structure is like this, our brain is like this, therefore, we see the world is like this what we see is not the world, but the world processed by the eye and the brain the worlds essence is the code, our true body is the decoder, the worlds manifestation is the reflection, our physical body is both the result and the cause of the reflection therefore, do not have to pursue the truth, the truth will never be Do not resist the illusion even if you cant pursue it, no matter how you pursue it, its just a matter of replacing it with another illusion (like a cornea transplant) or superimposing it with another one (wearing glasses on the eyeball) Some people put too much emphasis on the so-called truth saying something like, Naked K is the king, the real trader doesnt use any technical indicators! In fact, the naked K is like the naked eye to see the world, see is also an illusion K line itself are a decoding mechanism market ontology is the K line, is the volume, is the quote? These are all forms constructed to more conveniently describe the ontology - how much more omitted, can not omit the illusion of this foundation really do not have to have this mental cleanliness, pure purity does not exist, we seek to be hygienic - hygiene is not pure, is there germs, but can operate in harmony so there is no shame in living in the illusion, living out the illusion of belonging to yourself, but rather the success point is, do not get lost in the illusion of not being controlled by yourself, that is controlled by the illusion for example, myopia patients if itself with a myopic glasses, or quite good, a great help if myopic glasses with a presbyopic glasses, presbyopic glasses on a sunglasses, sunglasses and then a windshield, windshield and then Wear a ...... then, what will see? Definitely not the truth, but the logic of the conflict of things (each mirror represents a logic of observation), the same thing, in different light, after layers of lens reflection and reflection, and finally do not know what became, this time to see this, the next time to see and become that on this basis, how to talk about consistency? The principle of Occams razor, simpler, less set, learn Bruce Lee, simple to win for example todays black plate, lets say rebar, there is a trader said, more single must go another said, I have been empty for several days then who read it? In their respective systems, in their respective worlds, they are clear-eyed people and failed traders, its as if they have no eyes and no glasses to look around, getting more and more confused