Avalanche - page 44

 
lexandros писал(а) >>
Increased the depot to 5000. Lasted almost a year:)



And I got better in one year from 16.03.09 to 16.03.10 on GBPUSD/.
If you optimise it, you can probably improve the result.
 
Figure... The period from 1.01.2009 to 31.01.2009. I wasn't able to export statistics... ...probably because of huge amount of deals.
The corridor is -40 pips. Profit 5 pips. Initial deposit is 10,000. lot 0.01. 3 pivots limited. As the topicstarter recommends.

The result is much more depressing than 10 reversals. I do not want to run to the complete sinking. IMHO everything is already quite obvious on a one-month run.

 
khorosh >>:


А у меня получше получилось за год с 16.03.09 по 16.03.10 на GBPUSD/


Give me the input parameters... The picture you've got here is pretty amazing.

And about the optimization, I think you're not serious:)
To get a nice picture - of course you can prooptimize... You can leave it overnight and optimize the corridor and the profit... And there will be a smooth curve upwards... But only on the optimized part:)
I hope you know it:))
 
lexandros писал(а) >>


Give me the input parameters... The picture you're getting is astonishing.

And about the optimization I think you're not serious:)
To get a nice picture you can of course prooptimize... You can leave it overnight and optimize the corridor and the profit... And there will be a smooth curve upwards... But only on the optimized part:)
I hope you know this :))

I have introduced some minor changes. I made the distance adaptive and closed the profit in my own way.

 
haha... it's not "lavina" anymore !!!!
You are testing something of your own!!! You're ignoring the axiom that an avalanche is unkillable... Why do we need to see the stats from some lame strategy of yours that's giving you a profit? It's not an avalanche at all!!!
%))))
 


State in a month with a demo. One of my advisors... Avalanche with minor changes... No martin. no corridor, no avalanche strategy at all... Almost an avalanche in short:)
 
lexandros писал(а) >>
haha... well it's not "lavina" anymore !!!!
You are testing something of your own!!! You're ignoring the axiom that the avalanche is unkillable... Why do we need to see the stats from some lame strategy of yours that's giving you a profit? It's not an avalanche at all!!!
%))))

The topic starter did not ask for the distance to be constant, on the contrary, he recommended to determine it depending on the volatility. And he didn't limit the profit too.
I have not seen such pictures many times on the forum.
 
Again, twenty-five.... Tomorrow's volatility does not depend on yesterday's volatility. you can adjust the corridor as much as you like according to history, it does not mean that the price will go the same way... It was walking by 200 pips for a year, the price will start to walk by 50 pips tomorrow and will walk the same way for a month, this will be enough to kill the deposit, and it will start to walk by 500 pips in a month.
And note that no one will warn you about it, and you won't be able to introduce adaptive changes into the corridor.
You will just watch that the price has moved back from your adaptive corridor, touched it and went back... You'll be thinking: "Now it's going to go further, but it's going back again... And the eqi is rapidly decreasing... and the lots and the bail are rapidly increasing... the hairs on her head and all the other places are beginning to move and maybe even gray... and there it is at last! BINGO!!!
the price has swung back once again contrary to all previous history. There is not enough margin to open a new lot. The only thing left to do is to close everything at a loss of 90% of the depo, or wait for Kolya to do it for you.
 

The maximum lot of the position during the year was 0.64. Maximum drawdown 686.43(33.32%).

 
ZS: playing with such TCs is very much like a game of "Russian roulette", even with a hypothetical drum of 40 rounds and only one loaded. The probability of a shot being fired is not great. 1/40. But it's still there... And sooner or later, that particular one loaded cartridge in the cylinder will still fire.


Any TC implies a loss... They are inevitable. But the fundamental difference is that in Martingale one loss becomes the last one. Like a shot to the temple.
Reason: