Martingale is Evil?! - page 5
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
It's like: let's take a fast draining EA and enter on its opposite signals...
Neutron 19.01.2009 11:36
It's a question of optimal behaviour. Yes, you can behave as you like, but the only type (pattern) of interest is the one that leads as fast as possible to the goal (as a rule). ...
so that's it - if you go in on the opposite signals...of a losing EA than is that not optimal behaviour?
that's what you get - if you enter on the opposite signals...a draining advisor what is NOT optimal behaviour?
Oh shit, Maximus, are you kidding me?
It is clear that for for TS to be profitable after the turn, it has to drain at least twice the spread on each transaction (on average) before the turn. Can you go on? Do you know what it takes to write such a TS? And to buy? That's right! You don't write it and you don't buy it.
I have a question: if all of the existing methods are not optimal and do not give a guarantee, why is not a martin method? because if you lose another method, why do all write that just can not use it properly. why in this case, the loss when using a martin - logical?
It's not funny anymore.
"Oh, come on! - "It's $200 around the corner, and you bought it for $100. Who are you after that?"
Oh, shit, Maximus, are you kidding me?
It is clear that in order for the TS to be profitable after the flip, it must drain at least double the spread per transaction (on average) before the flip. Can we go on from here?
No tricks ! I have just created an Expert Advisor with reversal after losing, i.e. classical antimartin, so here is the picture:
entering market both in buy and in sell by the same condition.)
This kind of EA has serious problems with drawdowns. Imagine if you get into such a series of drawdowns at the beginning of trading, when the deposit is relatively small. Micro lot trading is not a panacea, because the profits will be comparable.
This kind of EA has serious problems with drawdowns. Imagine if you get into such a series of drawdowns at the beginning of trading, when the deposit is relatively small. If you trade microlots, it is not the panacea, because the profits will be comparable.
So don't be greedy, let the profit be small but sure.
It's not funny any more.
"Oh, come on! - "It's $200 around the corner, and you, you bought it for $100. Who are you after that?"
I don't really understand your answer.
But I would like to write about something else. I have an Expert Advisor written by Kim using my algorithm . By the way, he is against martin in principle. But I have a feeling it will not fail if I correct it a bit. I set myself a task to take a certain fixed profit every day. It seemed to me that I have solved it. I was not able to finish it by myself. I'm not a programmer. I could only redo it a little bit. And not without help. I think if I add a couple of conditions to it, it'll be profitable. I'm testing it on the demo with varying success. I have also noticed that the EA has become profitable only after I manually follow the conditions I have specified. Perhaps something else can be added. It can be done to eliminate losses. This is what caused me to write this article. You agree that it would be very disappointing if my Expert Advisor had become profitable, but I never learned about it. I have already noticed that I didn't even know the word "martin" when I "invented" it.
With respect, without trying to change anyone's mind but welcoming healthy discussion, Azer. :-)