Is martin so bad? Or do you have to know how to cook it? - page 22

 
iModify:

.....Thanks for the compliment....))

I'm posting the testing stats....that's enough.

If you only do backtesting, it will not be enough. Here is an old qq EA (qq is its name) working on momentum principle. Just bar 1 is replaced by bar 0 :) and something else there. And backtesting with every tick on a closed bar :) In trading, of course - it fails.

Forum

Traders Joking

newdigital, 2012.12.30 21:27


Backtesting cannot be proof of a system's profitability. Because we don't know what's inside (what was encoded in the source code). Along with backtesting, the source code would be good. Or trading results without source code - (here I cited trading results) - in case of MT4 for example.

 

The bot engine is based on fuzzy logic.

Inputs are determined by a simple principle: warm-cold-warm-very warm-hot-cold-very cold, etc.

MM-you can call it Martingale, but not in the way everyone is used to using it.

Bot passes trends of 1500 pips, the margin remains.

No indicators and all sorts of other junk)).

 
iModify:

.....Thanks for the compliment....))

I'm posting the testing stats.... that's enough.

You're welcome. Good stats, especially like his jerks at the end, odd that they're only downwards. You really are a "quant".

220Volt:
This is much worse, I can't imagine anything worse. In my opinion the only and only effective MM is martin and its variations (which preserve the principle of increasing the lot after a sliv), everything else is an illusion. But probably many will disagree with me.

YYYY))) Don't sweat it. Just how many will agree, because it's in unison with the everyday automatisms of man. One need not be afraid that everyone will suddenly have an epiphany or begin to have an epiphany, it requires expensive education and vast experience that only 1 in a million can afford, by noble birth or very rare luck.

I can repeatedly prove mathematically and cite authorities without fear of opening my eyes to potential competitors. The reason is that my opinion is a statistical fluctuation that is normally filtered through the persistent domestic habits and the massive propaganda of those who exploit those habits. I wouldn't allow myself to speak out honestly(sometimes) if I assumed I had much influence. Why would I do that? But knowing that everything is in vain, I can afford it, for the purpose of seeing the reaction of the lambs, it's always amusing when deliberate nonsense resonates and truth is ridiculed. We are each other's competitors after all.

I forbid everyone to read Kahneman D., Slovik P., Tversky A. - "Decision-Making in Uncertainty: Rules and Biases" is nothing worse! The book was written by lamers.

iModify:

Everyone can disagree, but few provide concrete evidence of the correctness of their MM.

You can discuss the math as long as you like, but where is the application of this "Right" math?)

I have already sent pros to this forum to poke fun at beginners and seasoned lambs, thank you. Can I prove to you that your trade at the end of a period of 1-2 trades is close to marginal? You yourself exhibited a series of avalanche losses, which needed only 1-2 positions to drain everything. Why provoke? I'll prove it if you insist.

iModify:

The bot engine is based on fuzzy logic.

Inputs are determined by a simple principle: warm-cold-warm-very warm-hot-cold-very cold, etc.

MM-you can call it Martingale, but not in the way everyone is used to using it.

Bot passes the trends of 1500 pips, the reserve remains.

No indicators and all sorts of other junk)).

Warm Cold Cold Cold Warm))))))))))))) That's the fuzzy logic! You are a genius, if you are sobering up, at least don't fudge the indicators you use in your presentation video. In the beginning and at the end there is a trivial chop off indicator ala envelopes and 1 in 1 orders on its levels.

I can respect a skilled scammer, but an imbecile such as you should be punished, then thank you for the science. That's it, black mark for now.

 
m.butya:

Oh, please. Nice straight, especially like his jerks at the end, odd that they're only downwards. You really are a "quantum".

YYYY))) Don't sweat it. Just how many will agree, because it's in unison with the everyday automatisms of man. One need not be afraid that everyone will suddenly have an epiphany or begin to have an epiphany, it requires expensive education and vast experience that only 1 in a million can afford, by noble birth or very rare luck.

I can prove many times mathematically and cite authorities without fear of opening my eyes to potential competitors. The reason is that my opinion is a statistical fluctuation that is normally filtered through the persistent domestic habits and the massive propaganda of those who exploit those habits. I wouldn't allow myself to speak out honestly(sometimes) if I assumed I had much influence. Why would I do that? But knowing that everything is in vain, I can afford it, for the purpose of seeing the reaction of the lambs, it's always amusing when deliberate nonsense resonates and truth is ridiculed. We are each other's competitors after all.

I forbid everyone to read Kahneman D., Slovik P., Tversky A. - "Decision-Making in Uncertainty: Rules and Biases" is nothing worse! Really lamers wrote it.

It's funny and sinful, I send professionals to this forum to poke fun at novice breeders and seasoned lambs, thank you. Do you need proof that your trade at the end of a period of 1-2 trades is close to a merger? You yourself exhibited a series of avalanche losses, which needed only 1-2 positions to drain everything. Why provoke? I'll prove it if you insist.

Warm Cold Cold Cold Warm))))))))))))) That's the fuzzy logic! You are our genius, if you are sober, at least do not stain the indicators that you use in your presentation video. At the beginning and at the end is a trivial bumping inductor ala envelopes and 1 in 1 by its levels of orders.

I can respect a skilled scammer, but you should be punished, thank you later for the science. That's it for now, black mark.

I understand your aggression.) I'm putting you on ignore.

All the best!!!

 
  • If it's just a besttest and nothing, it's nothing ....
  • If a forward test - that's enough for something.
 
newdigital:
  • If the forward test is enough for anything.
If you were right. If the forward is for yourself with knowledge, then ok. If it's for show, same eggs, only in profile.
 
TheXpert:
If you were right. If forward is for yourself knowingly, then ok. If for show, then it's the same eggs in profile.

I don't know what kind of balls there are, but if the comrade traded even on demo, it's more impressive if he shows a profit of 2.000 percent for there ... two years by backtest. Because to trade for at least one month - you need to rent vps for this month (pay like that), and attach your Expert Advisor (which he does not show to anyone) to the chart, and wait a month ... and then show the result (and what it will be ... this result ...).

Of course, many sell by backtest to avoid the hassle ... But in my memory there were so many different cases on this subject (even in Interpol), that I simply advise to do at least two weeks forward testing using demo trades (if selling an EA) together with the backtest. This could at least make it safer somehow ...

 
newdigital:

I don't know what kind of balls there are, but if the comrade traded even on demo, it's more impressive if he shows a profit of 2.000 percent for there ... two years by backtest. Because to trade for at least one month - you need to rent vps for this month (pay like that), and attach your Expert Advisor (which he does not show to anyone) to the chart, and wait a month ... and then show the result (and what it will be ... this result ...).

Of course, many sell by backtest to avoid the hassle ... But in my memory there were so many different cases on this subject (even in Interpol), that I simply advise to do at least two weeks forward testing using demo trades (if selling an EA) together with the backtest. This can at least somehow secure ...

Bot trades here /*deleted*/
 
iModify:
The bot trades here /*deleted*/

So that's what I'm saying - whether that bot is bidding, or something else is bidding ... no one knows (except you of course) ... :)

Forex is always on trust, and if people don't know each other at least virtually, and don't trust each other - then no matter what is traded ... :)

You just have to participate in the forum, in the discussions, to be known ... etc.

Advertising is banned here ... People here do not advertise their signals and their products in the Market not because they do not want to ... you understand ...

 

As for my post here (there's a statment in the attachment):

Forum on trading, automated trading systems and trading strategy testing

Is Marting so bad? Or should I know how to prepare it?

newdigital, 2013.05.29 11:06


I agree. There is some illusion about martin that it may be more profitable than other strategies. Here's a public advisor, martin (attached is stats), annual ROI 68% on 3,000 initial deposit. MT4 sorry, and has been holding since last February.

I do not do signals on it only because I want to transfer it to MT5 ... If you do not have any illusions about its superprofitability.

so i posted the source here back in january with settings etc.

So do you ... what's the problem? you're not advertising anything here, are you? the source code, with the settings ... and everything will be fine ... but for advertising you get banned here...

Maybe you are trading my bot :) :) So let's compare ...


Why some great coders and trading system developers are ignoring Metatrader 5? - MQL4 forum
  • www.mql5.com
Why some great coders and trading system developers are ignoring Metatrader 5? - MQL4 forum
Reason: