You're using a "lock" - page 8

[Alexandre]

There were also links in that thread about MT4 with an investor password. Went through them and saw this obscenity with my own eyes. :)))

Note: this kind of drawdown accumulated over several months. I don't remember how it ended there, I think it was a natural stop-out when I tried to manage it.

[Aleksey Rodionov]

alexjou:

There were also links in that thread about MT4 with an investor password. Went through them and saw this obscenity with my own eyes. :)))

Note: this kind of drawdown accumulated over several months. I don't remember how it ended there, I think it was a natural stop-out when I tried to manage it.

The year 2006 was written, your humour is good, I wouldn't remember how it ended either.

[Mykola Demko]

alexjou:

In that thread there were references to MT4 with investor password. I walked on them and saw this obscenity with my own eyes. :)))

Note: this kind of drawdown has accumulated over several months. I don't remember how it ended there, I think it was a natural stop-out when I tried to manage it.

By the way, few people pay attention to this. The loc has one very bad trait compared to closing.

Depo loading. Instead of fixing the losses and releasing the deposit, the locker increases the deposit and thus is no longer free to use these funds.

This example is a good proof of that. There are plenty of blocked positions that blocked the use of funds with their collateral, although the netting position may be in a small drawdown (read small losses),

But it is impossible to earn anything, as there is no possibility to open additionally (just no funds for collateral).

But to counterbalance: the lock has positive qualities, for example in your dealing level freezing is big enough, and you pipsing with a target level less than freezing, then the lock to help you, open one position, caught profit less than the level of freezing, lock, when you creep over the line level of freezing lock can destroy (in aggressive pipsing, depending on the situation with double benefit), you can even destroy one more position instead of one closed (such an endless lock :)

But this advantage of location is leveled by modern trading conditions, in many dealers the freeze level is 0, soon we will have to put positions inside the spread (dreams).

[Alexandre]

Zeleniy:
2006 was written, your humour is good, I wouldn't remember how it ended either.

Not for the sake of humour, but for the sake of edification. Especially since 2006, the number of fans of this foolishness probably has not decreased, especially among newcomers. I show a picture like this wherever I go and wherever especially zealous people appear. :)))

Urain is absolutely right about the deposit: the "killed" account then had about $600 of the original $2,500-3,000 available. And about the level of freezing, too: locks were often used as a purely technical trick against then high levels of freezing, and as soon as it became more or less clear where we were going next, the lock was immediately removed and it did not do much harm. It is fair to say that in that very case, and as far as I remember it was proven later, there was simply fraud, sometimes still occurring today, well known as "investor pyramid schemes". Apparently the rogue manager was using the locks to slow down the draining of the "condemned" account. However that may be, the overall conclusion is disappointing: no matter what locks are used for - self-deception or deliberate deception - in any case they are evil, and they have no place in any serious trading. :)))

[Aleksey Rodionov]

What self-deception, what evil.

I've already said that for everyone the 'lock' function is something like their character.

Everyone has a different theory of locus. The general scheme is one, but the reasoning and understanding is different.

I personally do not agree with you (who wrote above), I have my own understanding.

[Andrew Petras]

alexjou:

Not for the sake of humour, but for the sake of edification. Especially since 2006, the number of fans of this foolishness probably has not decreased, especially among newcomers. I show a picture like this wherever I go and wherever especially zealous people appear. :)))

Urain is absolutely right about the deposit: the "killed" account then had about $600 of the original $2,500-3,000 available. And about the level of freezing, too: locks were often used as a purely technical trick against then high levels of freezing, and as soon as it became more or less clear where we were going next, the lock was immediately removed and it did not do much harm. It is fair to say that in that very case, and as far as I remember it was proven later, there was simply fraud, sometimes still occurring today, well known as "investor pyramid schemes". Apparently the rogue manager was using the locks to slow down the draining of the "condemned" account. Anyway, the general conclusion is depressing: no matter what locks are used for - self-deception or deliberate deception - in any case they are evil, and they have no place in any serious trading. :)))

In that case the lock was put by an investor, an attempt to stop the process.

Otherwise, that's about it.

[Alexandre]

Silent:

In that case, the lock was put by an investor, an attempt to stop the process.

Otherwise, that's about it.

No. It was the manager who placed the locks, who traded the "monkey". The investor, he claims, did not touch the trade at all, and there is good reason to believe this assertion. However, it is an old and long time ago closed story, and the picture I cited is just an illustration of what horrors the lock not removed in time may lead to. :)))

[Andrew Petras]

alexjou:
No. It was the manager who placed the locks, who traded the "monkey". The investor, as he claims, did not touch the trade at all, and there is good reason to believe this claim. However, it is an old and long time ago closed story, and the picture I cited is just an illustration of what horrors the lock not removed in time may lead to. :)))

http://forum.fxclub.org/showthread.php/33294-%D0%9E%D1%82%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BC-%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8B%D0%B9-%D1%81%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%82?p=614265&viewfull=1#post614265

It's a well-known story. Loki was put up by an investor. She just didn't have any more options.

[Alexandre]

Silent:

http://forum.fxclub.org/showthread.php/33294-%D0%9E%D1%82%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BC-%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8B%D0%B9-%D1%81%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%82?p=614265&viewfull=1#post614265

It's a known story. Loki was put up by an investor. She just didn't have any more options.

Right. (chuckles) Looked through that thread again. Pardon me. Well, you got yourself in trouble. :))) You don't want to use any more vicious methods.

[Aleksey Rodionov]

sergeev:

Firstly, idiomatic expressions are not welcome in the handbook.

Second, lock is not an algorithmic feature, but a disease of the trader's brain (psychopathology) at the penultimate stage.

Thirdly, I can't enter information that I don't understand whether the author confirms or disproves it.

Maybe you could organize an article with MQ that would dispel the myth of lots once and for all. Discussed many times, but people have their own imagination, can prove theoretically with practice.