## Edge, separating work and play

Of course, each reader can solve this dilemma by yourself, I can only express my personal opinion. Also, I do not want to involve the mathematical apparatus of probability theory and statistics, where, in fact, there are tests for randomness (that is successful) or pattern in a sample. I do not want in the first place, because in most cases, scholars have come to the conclusion about the random nature of the price changes, so their unpredictability and, consequently, can not be successful speculation. And secondly, even giving a positive answer to the test for randomness does not prove that same chance. On this occasion, by the way, I recall an old anecdote.

Arguing atheist and believer.

The believer says the atheist, they have three years ago pop drunk and fell from the tower, but did not crash.

Believer: We attribute this miracle, what do you explain that?

Atheist: Random!

Believer: Well, the next year pop again fell from the tower and crashed. We attribute this miracle, how about you?

Atheist: Match!

Believer: But this year, pop, once again mustered, fell from the bell tower - and again nothing! We attribute this miracle, how about you?

Atheist: I can not say - it is a habit! ..

... And I would not want to debate with supporters matstatistiki: knowledge of the subject does not guarantee success, and there is a chance of success, even if you do this science has no clue. I would like to analyze the most important question, which has to solve speculators entering the market - the question of the minimum amount of money necessary to succeed in the market. It is clear that success is directly proportional to the capital that you have. Undoubtedly, the more money and what they are "long" - the better. Most experts agree that there is a minimum below which success depends on luck. But what is it, this minimum, the simple answer, I think, does not exist.

20 cents for profit!?

Today, the issue even more confused. Some time ago, in his paper [2], I said that in the general case for successful speculation is sufficient amount of \$ 2,000, although the work with such a sum may require incredible patience. The definition of "incredible" is telling. However, the value of \$ 2000 still leaves hope scalper, although a much more optimistic look at the initial amount of 10,000. But from then on the market there have been very significant changes which, I think, pushed the value of the minimum amount of speculative work on the exchange in the region far more. These changes are - detsimalizatsiya, that is transition quotes from common fractions (1/4 or 1/8) to a decimal (0.25 or 0.625), and the introduction of new regulations for day trading.

It is surprising, but, apparently, no one imagined the impact of these innovations. Like, probably the best way ... These changes, 'killed' deytreyding small speculators and complicated life larger, resulting in an outflow from the market of private investors, that is to say the small speculators, which, in turn, has led the market in a phase of "random walk." This means that the "random walk" (instead of "random walk" technical analysts often use the euphemism "Range», range) make it impossible to make even an experienced speculator. He can play. As in the casino. But does not work. Realizing this, the scalper out (or have gone) from the market, in such a market has no prospects. In the book, Lefebvre [3] I found the following sentence: "I had to admit that the people and bad luck can make my game completely ineffective". It was written in 1923. And today, I have no reason not to trust the author and myself.