Avalanche - page 98
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
Вы ошибаетесь, никто ничего не обязан.
No, Yuri, the topicstarter is obliged to understand the thread he started. Why else would he have started it?
That's not a question for me.
Well, let someone who knows answer it.Because if he's trading, he'll be out in six seconds. :) And if he does not trade - then what the hell is going on here? :)
Нет, Юрий, топикстартер именно обязан разбираться в ветке, заведенной им самим. Иначе зачем ветку-то заводил?
Only if I moderate it. The thread has 80% shouting, insults, believe/don't believe games, humour, etc. If I were a moderator, there'd be a hundred or so posts left in the thread that make any sense at all. And I'm not going to hold the hand of all the newbies on the topic. If a person is interested, they'll read all the posts in a couple of hours. If you're sorry to spend a couple of hours on something that affects your livelihood, your well-being - you have nothing to do in this thread. Are you suggesting that I should waste my time for you? And you're trying to make it my responsibility. Think before you post.
Ветку он завёл, чтобы поделиться алгоритмом, а не для того, чтобы постоянно кого то тыкать носом в то, что он написал когда то ранее.
The positive, i.e. conventionally profitable algorithm, apart from the top-starter himself, is understood only by you.
Do you think he shared it well?
Well, every idea goes through certain stages before it is implemented. You can't have a finished product right away. If it doesn't sell yet, it means the idea is in the thinking and development stage.
>>Yeah. :)
JonKatana >> Только в том случае, если я ее модерирую.
Such a proposal has already been put forward. So far it has not been supported by the forum owners. The right of limited moderation, if ever given, will only be given to some deserving members. You are not one of them yet. But that does not mean you are not responsible for what you have created.
The positive, i.e. conventionally profitable algorithm, apart from the top-starter himself, is understood only by you.
Do you think he shared it well?
No idea can be understood by everyone. As all people have different abilities. I think you are wrong in thinking that only I understood the algorithm. Of course, it was easier for me, because I used a similar algorithm to write an Expert Advisor 2 years ago. The first order was opened manually and then like an avalanche. At that time, I didn't like increasing lots in lots and did not try to automate the first order to check the profitability of this method in the tester. And when I read the avalanche thread, the author infected me with his confidence and I decided to check this algorithm in the tester.Не закроются. Закрыв с прибылью, например, четыре ордера суммарным объемом 0.80, вы получаете все залоги за эти ордера обратно. И выставляете один отложенный ордер в том же направлении таким же объемом 0.80. В случае его открытия возвращенные залоги у вас опять заберут, причем точно такой же стоимости, как и до закрытия (ведь объемы равны). А вот закрытая вами прибыль останется.
Например: в залоге на плюсовых ордерах у вас 5000 рублей, остаток средств на счете 1000 рублей. Вы закрываете эти ордера, получив, например, 2000 рублей прибыли. На счету у вас 5000 (возвращенный залог) + 1000 (остаток) + 2000 (прибыль). Вы выставляете новый ордер такого же объема, как и сумма объемов закрытых. Он срабатывает. 5000 уходит в залог (объем сделки тот же), 1000 (остаток) остается, но и 2000 у вас остаются. То есть всего у вас 3000 свободных средств. В реальности чуть меньше из-за спредов и чуть дальнего выставления нового ордера, но сути это не меняет. И так можно делать при каждом развороте, оставаясь в "Лавине" и спокойно ожидая выхода на безубыток. Непрерывно получая прибыль.
Geez... I'm running out of words... I should probably wash my hands of this... I can't get my mind around this.What's this got to do with the bail ????? The pledges will be repaid, but when you have a loss on an elk already bloated by previous moose trades - it gives such a drawdown, that the pledges of this amount - kopecks... What is in bold in this situation plays on the contrary the most important role.
Because if the price moves even a couple of points against you, you won't have the problem with the pledges. The total losing lot is such that a one-point movement overwrites all of the deposits taken together... When the price reaches the pause that you set (if it gets there before the margin call), with a volume equal to all closed profitable (as you suggest), you simply have no margin for this trade order to be executed. The collateral has absolutely nothing to do with it...
You are a pure theorist and have never worked in forex... This is 100% obvious from your statements that have nothing to do with forex...
Такое предложение уже выдвигалось. Пока оно не нашло поддержки у владельцев форума. Право ограниченной модерации, если когда-нибудь и дадут, то только некоторым заслуженным участникам. Вы пока в их число не входите. Но это не означает, что Вы не несете ответственности за то, что было создано Вами.
Yes. There has been such a suggestion. If this is not due to technical difficulties in modifying the "engine", the position of the owners is not clear to me. It would be less work for them, and the quality of the content, and therefore the resource, would be higher. After all, they could always take away the delegated rights of limited moderation. If anything.
Yes. There has been such a suggestion. If this is not due to technical difficulties in modifying the "engine", the position of the owners is not clear to me. It would be less work for them, and the quality of the content, and therefore the resource, would be higher. After all, they could always take away the delegated rights of limited moderation. If anything.
I'm personally against it. :)