Discussion of article "Grid and martingale: what are they and how to use them?" - page 10
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
"I played with pyramiding in the tester. Initial entry was made either by the button of the Expert Advisor control panel or by setting the trend direction with the panel switch and entry was made at the breakdown of the extremum of the last completed candle. The Expert Advisorbuilt a pyramid and also set and modified stop losses. Profit closing was done manually by the panel button. From the experience gained, these are my thoughts. In order to make the total loss of the pyramid approximately equal to the loss of the first order when the stop is triggered without pyramiding, the stop should be approximately equal to the order grid step equal to 12 p (as recommended by Alexander). To get at least some effect from the pyramid, you need to wait at least for the second order to reach profit. But with such a small stop-loss it often triggers, closing the pyramid or a single first order with a loss. And waiting for three or more orders to trigger is possible only in cases when the price, as they say, shoots. So the pyramid can have an effect only if the starting entry is made very accurately and the price shot without pullbacks, or with very small pullbacks. Well, there is still an option, if stops are made more, but in the case of the pyramid, the increase in stop loss leads to a significant increase in the loss when it triggers." khorosh wrote in that thread. Here we come to the same conclusion as this article.
It all comes down to the fact that you need to know where the price will go and then build pyramids. The pyramid as well as the grid is designed for a big movement, if the trend, the pyramid either buy or sell, if flat, buy-sell alternate. But the whole point is that you have found a trend or a flat and at the same second they took and reversed and what then? You have to be a hardcore forecaster. And nobody knows how to do that.
Yes, pyramiding is only MM, and nobody cancels the signal system.
For pyramiding you need to catch an impulse. Alexander catches it when breaking or rebounding from sloping levels. Apparently, when entering in the vicinity of a sloping level, the chances of catching a small pullback impulse are higher.
Here I showed the results of using pyramiding on the interval of one volatile month. The result is impressive, even with a constant lot + reinvestment. The stoploss there is certainly not 12 p, but much more, respectively, and the distance. But so far I have stopped halfway in the development of this topic, I have found good indicators, now I am creating a new TS on their basis. But I think I will come back to pyramiding.
Yes, pyramiding is only MM, and no one cancels the signalling system.
For pyramiding you need to catch an impulse. Alexander apparently catches it when breaking or bouncing from sloping levels. Apparently, the chances of catching a small pullback impulse are higher when entering in the vicinity of a sloping level.
That's quite possible. Only what is a sloping level, how to find it, what is its physics and in general what kind of a beast it is. It is clear what an ordinary level is, but as my practice shows levels are also a pure water figment of our inflamed consciousness. Ricochet does not ricochet there either, the only thing that works there is a rather high probability of price return to the level, i.e. we bet on a rebound, we put a target very close to it and if it does not ricochet and breaks through, then support can become resistance and vice versa, then the market will test the level and we will win back the drawdown. I saw such a robot in the market. So there he did not draw any charts, but everything was visible on the visualisation. I can find it by the way, if you search now. It works on the whole history, and the profitability there was about 12, if I am not mistaken. That's pretty fat. 3 is a dream come true for me.
It's quite possible. Only what is an inclined level, how to find it, what is its physics and in general what kind of a beast it is. It is clear what a normal level is, but as my practice shows levels are also a pure fruit of our inflamed consciousness. The only thing that works there is a rather high probability of price return to the level, i.e. we bet on a rebound, we put a target very close to it and if it doesn't ricochet and breaks through, the support and resistance may become the other way round, then the market will test the level and we will win back the drawdown. I saw such a robot in the market. So there he did not draw any charts, but everything was visible on the visualisation. I can find it by the way, if you search now. It works on the whole history, and the profitability there was about 12, if I am not mistaken. That's pretty fat. 3 is a dream come true for me.
Alexander posted a file describing how such levels are built in the Selian thread. And his indicator builds them.
Alexander posted a file describing how such levels are built in the Selian thread. And his indicator builds them.
It is clear that if you know how to build, it is not a problem to make an indicator. I would like to see the link, though it seems to me that it is not only about him, I think it is just to avoid looking at the market all the time.
It is clear that if you know how to build an indicator, it is not a problem to make one. I would like to see the link, although it seems to me that it is not only about him, I think it is just to avoid looking at the market all the time.
Here. If you make it, I hope you will give it to me).
Here. If you do, I hope you'll give it to me :)
I had a quick look, it's pretty uncomplicated. But it seems to me that the slope of levels to dance from the higher timeframe is not a good idea, because here I can see the prejudice that if the trend is on the higher timeframe, then the slope dances from it. Trends do not work tested, only the correction afterwards works. In general, I think that a machine can help here. I think it is necessary to search for such a slope of levels on the current timeframe in a fixed window, which gives a minimum of sloping levels, but the average number of hits on these levels will be maximum, so you can get away from the higher TF, especially since as I said it is only a psychological moment. This way we will determine the slope and the maximum strong channels. You need to read more about it. It is not a problem to implement it in the code. By the way, they also advise to play on the rebound and in case of failure just wait for a rebound from the next level or price return to the level and level reversal.
By the way, I understood the essence of the method, in general, it is not the channels that matter here, just sloping channels are illustrative. And ordinary levels are too simple ) . In general, the essence of this method is to find the most probable ricochet points. The idea of levels also contains this idea. It is just easier to work with levels, they do not change their price, but the sloping ones are constantly changing, and you need to build them based on the slope. Why do you need so many levels? )) It's simple, if a level is broken, then the next one will be lucky ))). Everything is the same as with ordinary levels. In reality, only level inversion and its subsequent retest works, which repels drawdowns. That is, the position goes into drawdown by breaking the level and then returns to it. Not always true, but very often. It works. But again, levels are just an abstraction that doesn't really exist. You can't calculate the strength of it based on the hits, or the duration in the future. There are no formulas, unless there are some homemade ones that have no statistics at all. Only backtest, only hardcore...
The fact that the levels are sloping has a logical justification. Often, when the lower extremum - the 1st point of the level - has already been formed, the second approach of the price to the level does not reach the low of the candle, on which the 1st point was formed, but reaches approximately to the price of this bar. I.e. lowes are at different heights, hence the sloping level.
The fact that levels are sloping has a logical reasoning. Often, when the lower extremum - the 1st point of the level - has already been formed, the second price approach to the level does not reach the low of the candlestick on which the 1st point was formed, but reaches approximately to the price of this bar. I.e. lowes are at different heights, hence the sloping level.
At first glance, yes, but what is the reason for this level? In our brains, it's just a line and an assumption that levels can be sloping. And if we go deeper into the physics of the process, what is a level at all? I don't know. There's no clear definition. Classically, it is a cluster of limit orders which has a large total volume which is very difficult to overcome, i.e. you need a very large volume to break through these limit orders or some time until they dissolve in time. In both cases to use these levels you need to know the volume of these orders that hang there and the approximate half-life of the level or some analogue. There is no theory. Only fairy tales and tall tales. Mol do this and do not do that, and why the hell knows, because my father said so )). No statistics. It is profitable for the market to support such tales about Tsar Saltan to slowly mow down the crowd. I'm just a man of science, and I trust only maths.