a trading strategy based on Elliott Wave Theory - page 292

 
<br/ translate="no"> So during that 10-month trade (at that drawdown) the channel didn't collapse? It was a powerful channel, though :)


Powerful channel is initially long and wide. Why is that surprising? Gather some statistics and you'll see that it happens too. I gave some of the statistics in the picture above for a small channel, 300 counts. Long channels (and they are also wide) live longer.

I'm not going to sit in a channel for 10 months and wait, I wrote that such deals will be blocked.



Look at the log, if OrderSend does not trigger, there is a record of the reason.


error code 130, I wrote.
 
A powerful channel is inherently long and wide. Why is that surprising? Gather some statistics and you'll see that this happens too. I gave part of the statistics in the picture above for the small channel, 300 counts. Long channels (and they're also wide) live longer.

No, I'm not picking on you :). It's just that the channels in my case were floating and breaking up, and I was not quite sure what to do with an open order.
So it turns out that when a "good" channel is found, the search for a new one is not performed until it is destroyed? However, there is really no sense in discussing the algorithm. I just want to say about possible "alignment" - I don't think any I/O alignment is incorrect, but at the model investigation stage it only blurs the picture.
error code 130, I wrote.

Firstly, I haven't seen this yet when I wrote it :). Secondly, in the tester record you can see the OrderSend parameters. Usually non-normalized price is visible at once. Also, it often happened to me that stops were placed in wrong direction :), it is not directly written, but you can analyze it by figures :).
The correct price normalization is NormalizeDouble( ...,Digits), then the number of decimal places will always match the instrument.
 
<br / translate="no"> It's just that my channels have been floating and collapsing and I haven't figured out exactly what to do with an already open order. So, when a "good" channel is found, the search for a new one is not performed until it is destroyed?


I briefly told Gornilux how I collected statistics. This, roughly speaking, is where I started my research. If you haven't collected statistics like this, I recommend you do.

Evaluating channel stability is the only very weak point in the system. It's really, really hard. Now in MT a very simple algorithm is implemented - the channel length is fixed and at each bar its stability is evaluated. New stable channels are not searched in parallel. The strategy for this model is very simple - one channel one trade, I do not look for other channels during a trade.


I just want to say about possible "alignment" - I don't think any I/O alignment is incorrect, but at the model investigation stage it only blurs the picture.


This is what I do not really understand.


The correct price normalization is NormalizeDouble( ...,Digits), then the number of decimal places will always correspond to the instrument.


Indeed! I was looking for this function in mathematics and did not find it. Thank you.
 
One channel one trade, not looking for other channels during a trade.

Well, yes, that's what I assumed. The fact that channels appear at once is a very interesting point, but I believe you and will not repeat the research :)
I don't think any I/O alignment is incorrect, but at the model investigation stage it only muddies the picture.

This is what I don't really understand.

Suppose there is a basic entry/exit signal, but a closer look suggests that just now some local movement is taking place. If there is confidence in the correct assessment of the situation, it is often advisable to wait for it to end. Obviously, however, this practice can introduce a systematic bias into the results of the underlying model.
Oh, man! I looked for this function in the maths and couldn't find it. Thank you.

The example in the helper is not very good, it's not at all clear that Digits is a predefined variable, saving the user from having to figure out for himself how many digits to leave for a given instrument.
 
<br/ translate="no"> Not a single transaction, now trying to figure out why, or rather ask for an error code. Entered a few more options - no trades again. Eventually I got fed up with it and specified SL price level in head-on 20.0, it worked:



Like in that cartoon "I don't understand anything". Yuri, explain to the dinosaur how to put them correctly, and why the value of say 1.2 is worse than 20.0


Look at all the elements of the OrderSend function. You set the SL (stop loss) wrong and you got TP (take profit).
Don't get upset about this nonsense, it will work out. You are in the main ahead of us :)))
 
By the way, got home with a powerful computer and good internet without proxy. Downloaded the story, tried the first tests on the clock, and even with visualisation. By the way, the model is optimized for the clock, or rather an empirical formula for calculating the duration of the channel

Because I know for sure I would not have stood it and stopped this deal in the beginning. And what is the 20 points for SL, I have created a model for relatively large movements:



Here everything is clear, of course the deal is not concluded in an optimal way - I didn't know the movement trajectory and I still don't know it, and what extremums will be also I don't know. All I can do now is calculate levels and nothing more.

Yes, I sort of sat for 10 months on minutes with one trade, but the model is designed for this as well:

Start of transaction.


The end of the deal.


Pay attention to the dates. So I found it and calculated the movement. Would I be in deficit for 23 days waiting for the trend to go the right way? And in the area where the deal was concluded the most reliable conditions for the forecast, strange as it may seem. Of course, it is philosophy.

to Candid
<br / translate="no"> Suppose there is a basic entry/exit signal, but a closer look suggests that some local movement is just now taking place. If there is confidence in the correct assessment of the situation, it is often advisable to wait for it to end. Obviously, however, this practice can introduce a systematic bias into the results of the underlying model.


Conceptually clear. :о)




to Gorillych


Look at all elements of the OrderSend function. You have incorrectly set SL (Stop Loss) and TP (Take Profit).
Don't get upset by this nonsense, it will work out. You are in the main ahead of us :)))


Thanks, you and FED are the biggest optimists, and I'm not ahead of the curve, I think everyone has something in their pockets.

I`ve just realised now, I can`t use anything I`ve been working on for a year. B I'm not upset, I just gave up on this SL and the model, 200. Going to drink beer tomorrow and think a lot.

PS: and yet gather statistics, it should not lie on the road. :о)
 
<br / translate="no"> Thank you, you and FED are the biggest optimists, and I'm not ahead of the curve, I guess everyone has something in their stash.



Attempts to predict the market are getting more and more sophisticated, they use the most advanced mathematical methods, methods of mathematical statistics, various kinds of filters, price charts are logarithmic, differentiated, normalized, correlations are calculated, etc. ... So I, PhD in engineering, am gradually beginning to realize - how hopelessly I am lagging behind! These seemingly simple guys - traders easily operate with such complex concepts like linear and non-linear regression, their statements sparkle with the names of indicators that I have never heard of. As you read on, you begin to understand - oh, it's all developers of mechanical trading systems (MTS)! And everything falls into place. This pipe dream - to create a program that will trade for you and "make" a lot of money, attracts a lot of traders, like a bright light of a moth. And so many resources are spent!

When I used to work in the dealing room (now I only work from home), there was a group of what I called the analyzers, who stood out clearly. Their goal was changed, i.e. their goal was not to make money, but to analyze and predict the market behavior. This gave them a "high". Apparently, these guys went into the field of MTS design, and the process of creating these systems for them is satisfying.

I do not want to say in any way that I am clever and they are doing nonsense. It is very likely that they will invent something, they are dedicated, fanatical and often the most intelligent and educated professionals. Just as chemistry was born from alchemy, it is possible that something new and useful will emerge from their efforts. It is just the way they have chosen. But I am sorry for my time, so I'd better earn as I can.

A quote from "Forex for Beginners, Part 2" http://www.finlist.ru/beginner/beginner2.php

 

Спасибо, Вы и FED самые большие оптимисты, и вовсе я не впереди всех, полагаю, у каждого найдется чего ни будь в загашнике.



Attempts to predict the market become more and more sophisticated, they employ the most advanced mathematical methods, methods of mathematical statistics, various filters, the price chart is logarithmic, differentiated, normalized, correlation is calculated, etc... So I, a PhD in engineering, gradually start to understand - how hopelessly behind I am! These seemingly simple guys - traders easily operate with such complex concepts like linear and non-linear regression, their statements sparkle with the names of indicators that I have never heard of. As you read on, you begin to understand - oh, it's all developers of mechanical trading systems (MTS)! And everything falls into place. This pipe dream - to create a program that will trade for you and "make" a lot of money, attracts a lot of traders, like a bright light of a moth. And so many resources are spent!

When I had to work in a dealing room (now I only work from home), there was a group of, what I called, analyzers, who stood out clearly. Their goal was changed, i.e. their goal was not to make money, but to analyze and predict the market behavior. This gave them a "high". Apparently, these guys went into the field of MTS design, and the process of creating these systems for them is satisfying.

I do not want to say in any way that I am clever and they are doing nonsense. It is very likely that they will invent something, they are dedicated, fanatical and often the most intelligent and educated professionals. Just as chemistry was born from alchemy, it is possible that something new and useful will emerge from their efforts. It is just the way they have chosen. But I am sorry for my time, so I'd better earn as I can.

A quote from "Forex for Beginners, Part 2" http://www.finlist.ru/beginner/beginner2.php








I`m a bit confused by your post. I am not sure if you are a pessimist or a well-informed optimist. I can only add - never kill your dream, whatever it may be. Never. Its corpse will fester inside you all your life, poisoning it, more and more. Better drink a beer (a good one), it's a good drink.

So share how you can trade, what you use. It is interesting to hear a candidate of technical sciences, by the way, what kind of sciences? :о)
 
Reading this passage from the article I involuntarily thought: "obscurantism".
At one time, this word was used to describe attempts to devalue science and the scientific method of cognising the world, as well as attempts to prohibit research, thought and cognition. That is the attempt to forbid a person to be homo sapiens.
The author has, of course, slightly apologized (:-) in the last paragraph, but the attentive reader can hardly escape his subconscious desire to kick these kayfoving analysts, thereby compensate for his hopelessly lagging behind science complex. And at the same time to assert themselves. But of course! He does without any microscopes, with his bare hands what these "analysts" cannot do. :-))

I do not harbor any illusions concerning the possibilities of scientific knowledge, and rather pessimistically maintain my position in this respect. But what interesting twists and turns the human psyche can show!
 
Yurixx

I can see that the article hurt you, but the respected author is right about something.
It does not seem to me that the reason for writing the article was the notorious "hopelessly lagging behind science complex".
Rather, the author, for the umpteenth time, wanted to emphasize that some people change their system of priorities.

Mathematics (programming) comes first, and the size of the investment account comes second (third) +)
Reason: