Martingale is not evil at all, it brings profits - page 6
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
Averaging in its purest form... Lot increases as the balance increases... Step 100 p... Profit 100 p....
The maximum equity is 330000 or 230% profit...The market is certainly not random, but market development does not depend on the trading history of an individual account. Therefore, the history of trades cannot be considered as a criterion for determining the direction or value of new trades (or rather, it can be considered, but this consideration will not lead to a positive result).
Using "knowledge" of profitable (losing) trades to control future trades is the "classic" definition of martingale (usually a build-up). This endeavour, as you pointed out, is utopian.
But perhaps some participants call the martingale a build-up of positions using (considering) the rule of price reversal, which is always executed (though its beginning and end levels are unknown, but that's not the point). Then by taking some value (possibly variable) we can obtain a positive result for most of the trades. In this case a limitation is the size of the deposit or setting of trading conditions. But it is not a "classic" martingale, but trade with certain rules (trading criteria). I.e. in this case not a history of trades is used , but a regularity of price movement. Expectation of a certain amount of reversal of price movement that will cover previous losing trades by its volume.
P.S. Interested in your opinion on this subject https://forum.mql4.com/ru/11661
It somewhat overlaps with the topic of this thread. I.e. the use of certain patterns of price movements in trading.
Terms are the same... Differences balance size 25000... Maximum equity fixed is 114000 or 356% profit...
The deposit did not withstand an unrelenting trend of 2000 p...
Averaging and pyramiding is classic martingale with a small difference, losses are not fixed, but we increase the number of bets....
The market is certainly not random, but market development does not depend on the trading history of an individual account. Therefore, the history of transactions cannot be considered as a criterion either for determining the direction or value of new trades (or rather, it can be considered, but this consideration will not lead to a positive result).
Your statements are indisputable, but I would like to suggest that using the name - martingale, the participants POSSIBLY talk about different processes.
Using "knowledge" of profitable (losing) trades to manage future trades is the "classic" definition of martingale (usually a build-up). This endeavour, as you pointed out, is utopian.
But perhaps some participants call the martingale a build-up of positions using (or considering) the rule of price pullback that always occurs (though the levels of its beginning and end are unknown, but that's not the point). Then, taking some value (possibly variable) we can obtain a profitable variant for most of the trades. In this case the limitation is the deposit size. But this is not a "classic" martingale, but trading with certain rules (trading criteria).
Yes, such an idea has a right to life. I myself sometimes... no matter how many times I suspect (assume) the best for people. In fact, in this case (as is usually the case in other cases) it is simple and bad.
It's simple and bad: they don't mean a damn thing and aren't going to figure it out. They're not talking about the case, they're just unconsciously defending their habitual environment of notions-perceptions - the habitual environment... How easy it is to insist that Lokomotiv will win the current football championship! You don't have to think, it's enough to feel sympathy and emotion and to be sure that you're right. And get irritated if they don't agree with you. And raise your voice! And hit him over the head with a bottle, so he knows ours is better! And if anything, you can smash storefronts and set a couple of cars on fire...
This is Forex. You have to think, work, and work hard. It's a painful process! It means studying, expanding the range of concepts, burning the stupidity out of yourself, changing beliefs, habits, world-view, and lifestyle! You've got to be kidding!) To agree with a statement that is new to you means (oh, shit!) to admit that you were wrong. It's unbearable!:) It is much more habitual and easier to assert your belief that you are right and infallible. In this case it is not important whether you are right or not, but it is important that your self-perception of being right is in full harmony with your own ego.
For first time readers: Martingale is a delusion. If you don't believe it, that's your business. At least don't say later that you weren't warned.
---------
The value of the orders may of course vary. As I see it, the total bet level can be determined on the basis of statistics of alternating profitable and unprofitable bets, namely from the theoretically possible maximum series of unprofitable bets. The stakes should be such that a large series of losses, say, no more than 50% of the deposit loss, can be sustained. The general sense of such calculations is described in the article My First "Grail" in section 1.2.2. Aggressive reinvestments.
Besides, the order value, in my opinion, can also change proportionally to the probability of a positive result calculated in accordance with the TS model. For example, if a normal order value is 10% of the deposit (in conditions where the calculated probability is 60-65%), then with 70-80% probability the order value can be increased to 15%, and with 90-95% probability the order value can be increased to 20-25%. The probability of a positive result at any particular moment can be calculated differently and therefore the cost of orders may change during the course of trading. If the probability decreases significantly during the period in which the order is open, it makes sense to partially close the order. Of course, specific numbers need to be calculated, using proper testing for this purpose.
It's simple and bad: they don't mean a damn thing...
I'll stress my point again. Maybe they don't mean it, but that's the way it works. You fell into a pit not because you ran out of support under your feet, but because the law of attraction worked. It's the same in the case of martingale. "Working" is another pattern, whatever you want to call it.
Interested in your opinion on this matter https://forum.mql4.com/ru/11661 I would appreciate it.
It overlaps somewhat with the topic of this thread. I.e. the use of some kind of price movement pattern in trading.Deposit 100000.... Fixing only on the take... Maximum equity - 470000....
It is not hard to notice that there are areas on the chart where there is almost no drawdown or it is not big.... I.e., there is a level relative to which the price change is not significant... Now, to apply the averaging with minimal possible risk to the deposit you have to calculate the levels that occur most frequently in quotes history...
It's not hard to see...
It's not hard to see that plummets to zero...
Just after the new year the pound dropped sharply over 3000p, with almost no pullback...
I don't do the shuffle... The pound is chosen on purpose... as the most volatile pair.... The averaging tactic is only suitable for a flat....
In this case, the testing was done with respect to one level, which was dominating during the whole year (about 233.00) .... It's about finding such levels throughout the range as most likely to bring the price back....