Is martin so bad? Or do you have to know how to cook it? - page 31
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
And who prevents you from reversing the martin at the breakdown of a level or at another correction? Calculate all the risks for the maximum drawdown, of course you should not martinate by a factor of two in any case.
The ratio should be dynamic and depend on the probability of a price reversal for a correction.
By EurUsd in 208-2009 one can easily pass through 1500 points trends, with a drawdown, but still pass and gain a deserved profit. Thus, the usual working range of 400-600 pips is quite comfortable and profitable.
And who prevents you from reversing the martin at the breakdown of a level or at another correction? Calculate all the risks for the maximum drawdown, of course you should not martinate by a factor of two in any case.
The ratio should be dynamic and depend on the probability of price reversal for a correction.
For EurUsd during 208-2009 it is possible to pass through the trends of 1500 points without problems, with a drawdown, but to pass and obtain a deserved profit. But the usual working range of 400-600 pips is quite comfortable and profitable.
Quoting EvMir ....
When a trend is detected, the trend is turned on, when the flat is detected, the flat is turned on and therefore we can work with the trend by the principle of "antimartingale" and martingale on the flat where it is profitable. Nobody forces to work directly.
Is it not clear? It is quite understandable and simple. How you determine the entry points and martingale ratios is up to everyone. The main thing that entries should have more or less good statistical probability of rebound.
Dear Z expert, what MM principle do you use in your PAMM?
Normal. The account is over-expanded, so the risks are too high, so it turned out sideways. And what does this have to do with the subject?
I am not a pro trader and I am not afraid of mistakes, even expensive ones.
I am not touching your quote, although I might, take your example.
In a flat, the price doesn't move, where does the profit come from?)
Are you kidding? Flat is 3-8 times the trend and if you use a competent bounce it's at least 1/3 of the total profit, not using a flat is koshunstvo!
I'll tell you everything for a tenner. You may place an order at work. I will tell you in which cases martin will work.
Did I ask you to do that? I've made it clear that I know where it works and how to prepare it.
I don't think it has any place in trading. But I say there is, at least 70% of the time the market is in a channel, where chop systems and martin work.
Try to sell the proof to the esteemed Expert Advisor or Sergeev if you get it.
I will post figures with charts as soon as I have them, but for now just words.
Once again: I DO NOT NEED TO SELL ANYTHING! I actually thought that Gunya was joking about 50 bucks, but it turned out that you're dumping it for a penny... Why should I listen to you saying that the land is square for a buck?
I would say flat is not a flat, flat moves in a narrower sideways direction and how to make profit if it suddenly ends with martingale too)
Don't get fancy, please! We take two states, these are the clustering conditions in the context of this argument. Trend and flat. They can be defined very differently, but the main essence is that the trend strategy works on the assumption of the positive autocorrection of Momentum, and the negative one is correct on the flat as a supposition for the forecast. I.e. it is like inertia on a trend and a spring on a flat.
Your goal is to prove that Martingale ONLY on the flat is the worst MM choice.
My point is that on a flat (sideways, not trending, etc.) martin is a good MM.
Prize money - kudos to the community. No need to mention 10$ or 100$ again. The aim is much more global. Because except for rhetoric and examples with roulette in the web and books literate decomposition of martin in the context of exchange trading in the public domain is not. Who proves reliable, this or that position, of course worthy of respect.
Normal. The account is in a run-up, so the risks are overstated, so it came out sideways. What does this have to do with the topic?
If you wanted to jab, it didn't work, I don't consider myself a pro trader and I'm not, and I'm not afraid of mistakes, even expensive ones.
I'm not touching your cent, although I could, take an example.
You yourself mentioned that ALL martini accounts are drainers?
Do you think that 80% drawdown is normal? With such risks, you could have traded with a multiplier of 2 - a better chance to increase the deposit.
Are you kidding me? Flat is 3-8 times the trend and if you use a competent bounce it's at least 1/3 of the total profit, not using a flat is koshunstvo!
Did I ask you to do that? I've made it clear that I know where it works and how to prepare it.
I don't think it has any place in trading. But I say there is, at least 70% of the time the market is in a channel, where chop systems and martin work.
Try to sell the proof to the esteemed Expert Advisor or Sergeev if you get it.
I will post figures with charts as soon as I have them, but for now just words.
Once again: I DO NOT NEED TO SELL ANYTHING! I actually thought that Gunya was joking about 50 bucks, but it turned out that you're dumping it for a penny... Why should I listen to you saying that the land is square for a buck?
Don't get fancy, please! We take two states, these are the clustering conditions in the context of this argument. Trend and flat. They can be defined very differently, but the main essence is that the trend strategy works on the assumption of the positive autocorrection of Momentum, and the negative one is correct on the flat as a supposition for the forecast. I.e. it is like inertia on a trend and a spring on a flat.
Your goal is to prove that Martingale ONLY on the flat is the worst MM choice.
My goal is to prove that on a flat (sideways, not trending, etc.) martin is a good MM.
The prize money is kudos to the commuity. No need to say more about $10 or $100. The purpose is much more global. Because except for rhetoric and examples with roulette in the web and books literate decomposition of martin in the context of exchange trading in the public domain is not. Who proves reliable, this or that position, of course worthy of respect.
Actually for me the main problem was with large deposit. But it is solved. Found a way out - when trading on the euro $ 8000, for the pound $ 15000, for Australian $ 25000, but of course the profitability is different.
In general,there is nothing to do on Forex with a depo of less than $10k ofyour own and without outside investment. There is only one way out - PAMM account, but how can you compete with ultra-risky algorithms of your colleagues? PAMM accounts are quickly flooded with investments, if profitability is between 20% per month, it makes sense to have multiple PAMM accounts with 1-2k$, 3-5 accounts, diversified by everything you can, with high risk but reasonable. The aim is to run up one of the deposits and quickly fill up with investments. If all is well-calculated then one of 5 will return all investments and will fly into space, well, then to reduce the risk as the deposit grows. Well, this is lyric.
The main thing is that Martingale on rebounding TS and a few diversified (by strategy, by timeframe, etc.) accounts, greatly increases the probability of unwinding of the deposit. God forbid to trade so vigorously on one account with a deposit of less than 10K, usually 3 out of 5 such accounts are drained for 3-4 months, very sharply in less than a day, although usually by this time the investment is repaid, if you take 15-20% of the profit from each account per month, to insure, like "soft reinvestment"))
In general,there is nothing to do on Forex with a depo of less than $10k ofyour own and without outside investment. There is only one way out - PAMM account, but how can you compete with super-risky algorithms of your colleagues? If profitability is between 20% per month, it is reasonable to use multiple PAMM accounts with 1-2k$, 3-5 accounts, diversified in all possible ways, with high risk but reasonable. The aim is to multiply one of deposits and quick investments. If all is correctly calculated one of 5 accounts will return all of the investments and will fly into space, and then you have to cover the risk as the deposit grows. But this is only for fun.
The main thing is that Martingale on rebounding TS and a few diversified (by strategy, by timeframe, etc.) accounts, greatly increases the probability of unwinding of the deposit. God forbid to trade so vigorously on one account with a deposit of less than 10K, usually 3 out of 5 such accounts are drained for 3-4 months, very sharply in less than a day, although usually by this time the investment paid off, if you take 15-20% of the profit from each account per month, to insure, like "soft reinvestment"))
Do you consider 80% drawdown normal? With such risks, you could have traded with a multiplier of 2 - more chance of boosting your deposit.
No, I don't. On gold? Go ahead :) I'll have a look.