I guess what im trying to say is:
There isn't many ways to trade well, there's just one way to trade well.
And by that I mean I try to clarify what I do and I think about it. If I knew any way I would discuss that instead.
Like for instance if there was a system of combinations of indiors or what ever that I knew was much greater. I have assessed all known so and that there isnt called systems. They arent systems they're more like anti-systems since they dont systematicaly internet you profit but instead reduction .
Maybe in SKFX and a very few other traders I found quite tiny tidbits of knowledge, but 98% of the technical knowledge I found in my own.
Actually the greatest trader I understand, vastly greater then the historical gentlemen of 1931-32 and larger then Martin Armstrong and that sort of people, is Nunix.
Https://www.cliqforex.com/trading-sy...ys-course.html
What im trying to say is that the real, actual traders I understand that actual make it and will back up what they're saying, they all trade the same way.
They enter in the exact same region, the exit in the exact same loion, roughly.
It means that 99 percent of the traders that you find here are people who cant back up what they're saying. They're liers, frauds and men and women.
I dont consider myself a pessimist but 99 percent of people generally are weak, sick, content with themselves, egoists, fundamentalists.
There is a kind of struggle: To actually realise and to actually ACCEPT this is hard.
Humanity is sick. Society is sick. Hence the world is sick.
But there's beauty and the laughter of kids and the colour of the skies. There ARE smart folks and there ARE fascinating things to do.
They world will be OK and it will be great again because love is the strongest power in all of creation.
I will not be youre mentor. I will never be anybodies mentor in gambling. Why? Because its not possible to be. There is not any such thing as a trading coach. Not that I understand. Its like imagining a horse with wings that flies then a plane, it doesnt exist.
But I feel that I can VASTLY shorten those lets say 6 years to I dont know maybe a month? Maybe two years? Maybe 4? I dont understand. I do understand I will give it a try. Why? Because its better for me and you also Goldman sachs and Hilary Clinton which you get Goldman sachs and Hilary Clintons money rather than them using it. Why? That money sensibly because you are probably better then them spending. Odds are now you are not, although you might become corrupt. Thats why im writing this. Im not promoting anything and im not a fundamentalist so if you belive me or not isn't my enterprise. I back up what we state with data.
Actually the first two are pretty clean in accore with the concept I clarified, the next two aren't really good, but they exercised half decent. I needed to close the two when I did because I needed to go to work. Otherwise I would most likely have closed it when it arrived back thereabout the time and did not last down, netting me the exact same profit as it actually did.
The reason I use H1 is that anything bigger is to inexact. Its simply to slow/to large. Anything makes it systematical.
In practice it means that a low or high which is younger then a couple of hours isnt really that important to all the money being controlled.
In practice the news should go around, some people today need to sit in rooms and possess charts in front of the own eyes and some people today need to be called back to work and people need to drink coffee and go to the toilette and so on before any conclusions are made.
The reason I use E/U is the fact that it makes sense to me. Other tools seem to be systematic. Or at least I havent understood in how they're systematical.