OddevenEA : Based on pure probability :) and luck.... - page 2
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Fellah's....keep the idea's coming,....there are not any dumb questions or ideas...ok?
This is not the typical developers here and no one is going to bite your head off!...we actually trade in this thread
and Mamed...thanks for this thread...and good trading to all...
ES
P.S....and please do not misunderstand me...no live trading of this roulette wheel please...not yet.....(you got to practice counting the cards first!)
Add Magic Number?
Can you please add a Magic Number to the original version on post #1?
Thanks.
Can you please add a Magic Number to the original version on post #1? Thanks.
I think we don't need a Magic Number, because EA will identify its trade with Comment Value.
Correct me if i'm wrong.
aiigght... I've added the magic number, and more refined money management.
AccountType
0 : Standard account that not allowed fractal lots such as North Finance, MiG
1 : Normal standard/mini account that allowed fractal lots
2 : Micro nano account - InterbankFX, AFX-micro account.
Hope this thing can carry on and make a killer!
by the way, Demam.Emas, awak dari mana?
Regards
David
Thx for adding some modifications.
BTW, my first idea for MinLot and MaxLot should be determined by user, not broker.
Example:Trader X want to trade with MM, but he wants to trade max 10 lots for 1 position, so he should put MaxLot=10.
So, which one is better? MaxLot set by user/trader or MaxLot set by broker?
Davidke20, saya berasal dari Indonesia....
So, which one is better? MaxLot set by user/trader or MaxLot set by broker?
OK. Here I made a minor mod. You can now determine the MaxLot/MinLot. The EA will only interfere when your MaxLot exceeded broker's limitation, as well as the MinLot if it is lower then broker's limitation. So, if you have MaxLots=100, but you're trading on IBFX micro nano account, it will only allow you to trade below 50mini lots. Is this robust enough? Please let me know how is it going. I dont even have a tester here, all are done based on WordPad. By the way, about ES's suggestion, may be the thread author can download the EA posted by the contributor and update them on the 1st post. Meanwhile, its so nice to meet you here, Demam.Emas. Cheers.
Regards
David
Could I make a request from the developers?
Could post# 1 (demam emas) be the only post where the latest approved/official version is posted and could the input manual be there too and updated with each upgrade, showing a log of the updates? ...see this post in this following thread for the example of the layout and organization: https://www.mql5.com/en/forum
Humbly requesting in a little voice...Please?
Signed,
ChangingDirectionWithTheWindEachMinuteSavant
P.S. I cannot remember the last time I have had so much enjoyment. This EA slaps the face of traders...of TA...of gamblers...it is rebellious! Whoever dreamed that the time-of-day numerical odd-evenness, could be called upon for direction and then an attempt to tame that randomness through filtered, bet-size confirmation? The EA finds its way by reacting to randomness...reminds me of how the market reacts!! The randomness actually is the self-prove test in operational forward testing...lol
P.P.S. Very logical traders cannot trade this. But if one could arrive at consistently profitable trading through logic then there would be more success in Forex...I rest my case...
OK. Here I made a minor mod. You can now determine the MaxLot/MinLot. The EA will only interfere when your MaxLot exceeded broker's limitation, as well as the MinLot if it is lower then broker's limitation. So, if you have MaxLots=100, but you're trading on IBFX micro nano account, it will only allow you to trade below 50mini lots. Is this robust enough? Please let me know how is it going. I dont even have a tester here, all are done based on WordPad. By the way, about ES's suggestion, may be the thread author can download the EA post here contributed by the member, and continuosly update it on the 1st post. So people around the forum will not have to look for the EA when 5000post over. Meanwhile, its so nice to meet you here, Demam.Emas. Cheers.
Regards
DavidOk, I will test it later, but please reuplod the attachment, Please.
I keep on getting this error message: Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator.
ES's idea is great, I will update first post regularly.
Nice to meet yo too davidke20 and all of you
*EDIT*
Attachment is OK now. Thanks
P.S. I cannot remember the last time I have had so much enjoyment. This EA slaps the face of traders...of TA...of gamblers...it is rebellious! Who ever dreamed that the time of day could delermine a direction randomly and then an attempt to tame that through bet-size confirmation, through the back door! The randomness actually is the self-prove test in operational forward testing...lol
I don't think its necessarily a slap in the face to technical traders at all. This EA has the potential to prove two facts that you cannot escape. Firstly, the win / loss rate is a function of the ratio to target and stop loss selected. Try playing around with different combinations and you'll see what I mean. Try using the same sort of settings Steintz is using, like a 150 pip stop loss, and a 20 pip target, and you'll see very similar results to what his EA achieves. This fact remains regardless of if the method has an edge or not,and potentially it can confuse.
Secondly, and more importantly, the results obtained due to random entry are due a large extent on luck. Now try re running back tests starting on a different date each time, and see how the equity curve changes. Sometimes you'll get fantastic results, and sometimes appalling results, and yet its the same EA.
Once you realize that great results doesn't necessarily mean you've got a great EA, and poor results doesn't necessarily mean a poor EA, and you start to evaluate performance a little more rigorously then its time to move onto the next step, which is determining if you can use TA to improve results, which is basically what your doing with the RSI filter and money management.
Ive played with random entry systems for years, I cant really understand how anyone could even begin to develop an automated trading solution without understanding the role that random chance can play. Without knowing this, you don't know if any difference seen by adding an indicator is due to the indicator, or simply due to luck. Once people understand and accept this fact, they can start looking at TA from the right perspective.
really read this from zupcon folks...(sorry zuppy)
Once you realize that great results doesn't necessarily mean you've got a great EA, and poor results doesn't necessarily mean a poor EA, and you start to evaluate performance a little more rigorously then its time to move onto the next step, which is determining if you can use TA to improve results, which is basically what your doing with the RSI filter and money management.
Ive played with random entry systems for years, I cant really understand how anyone could even begin to develop an automated trading solution without understanding the role that random chance can play. Without knowing this, you don't know if any difference seen by adding an indicator is due to the indicator, or simply due to luck. Once people understand and accept this fact, they can start looking at TA from the right perspective.