Avalanche - page 413

New comment
 

"Consult a doctor before making a decision" (c)

>
 
IgorM:


the only reason to close this thread is simple: it is a demo game, not a word about the margin, not a word about the leverage.

Calculate what deposit is needed to open 10 orders with a margin of a price in one side and, respectively, in the second side, that is, 20 orders, let the initial order is 0.1 lot and estimate the balance of the deposit, so it will be able to handle the whole avalanche of orders and not to fall out at the stop out forex

if there's any avalanche-goers left who have a licensed vin with a calculator )))))) - calculate how much in money it will be and is it worth risking such a deposit for the sake of what the final profit in each series of trading with an avalanche of orders


I do not open more than 4 orders.
 
Mischek:

"Before you make a decision, consult your doctor" (c)

I'm not consulting a doctor, I'm consulting you, thanks for the advice.
 
3t5ya7m:

I do not open more than four orders.

You're going the right way, comrades. I was going as low as 3. My initial deposit was 10,000 (tester) and my initial lot was 1.5. I even got quite good profit with reinvesting in 2010 (~1400%), for 2009 with reinvesting I got ~200%, and 2009 without it I got a bit negative (my chart had some nice bumps), but I lost too much. I was just having fun with it. IgorM can confirm it - he also tested this thing.
 
PPC:

You're going the right way, comrades. I was up to 3. With the initial deposit of 10000 (tester) the starting lot was 1.5. And so there was nothing, it held. I even got quite good profit with reinvesting in 2010 (~1400%), for 2009 with reinvesting I got ~200%, and 2009 without reinvesting I got a bit negative, but I lost none of it. I am just having fun with it. I would not have missed it if I hadn't done so already.

I would need guarantee of "non-drainage" without optimization in the tester, I repeat - "non-drainage", not a profit, it will be a skeleton system, and the muscles will grow... all the rest is a virtual casino.
 
sever30:

You need a guarantee of "non-drainage" without optimisation in the tester, I repeat "non-drainage", not earnings, this will be the skeleton of the system, and the muscles will build up... everything else is a virtual casino.
I try not to optimise at all. The system should be sustainable without optimisation. I just don't like this system very much, so I don't dig it deeper, but I will apply some of my technical solutions in other experiments on cocksuckers. Right now, though, there's a catastrophic lack of time. The funny thing was also that there was always only 1 order in the market and it had hard stops. And all this was not 3-5 pips, but somewhere around 50 (can't remember exactly now - all this stuff is at home)
 
sever30:

You need a guarantee of "non-drainage" without optimisation in the tester, I repeat "non-drainage", not earnings, this will be the skeleton of the system, and the muscles will build up... Everything else is a virtual casino.

I'd like to specify "non-drainage" for how long, because it seems that there are no expert advisors without losing money in infinite intervals. For me the main criterion is that I should earn more than I would lose. This is the more practical criterion.
 
khorosh:

I want to specify "no loss" for how long, because it seems that Expert Advisors without a loss during infinite intervals cannot exist. For me, the main criterion is that I should gain more than I lose. This is the more practical criterion.

foreseeable past

Well, I've taken a swing at something that can't be... or maybe it can, or maybe it can't, or maybe... time will tell...

so we have different criteria

 
khorosh:

I would like to specify the "non-drainage" period, because there are probably no advisors without drainage on an infinite interval. For me the main criterion is that I should earn more than I lose. This is a more practical criterion.

Limitation of lot multiplicity allows making a zigzag chart when unfavourable conditions occur. That's what we strive for, to be in profit as a result. (IMHO: if you do not put a limiter - sooner or later the loss is inevitable).
 
PPC:

Limiting the multiplicity of the lot increase just gives a zigzag graph when adverse conditions occur. This is what we strive for, in order to be on the plus side as a result. (IMHO: if you do not put a limiter - sooner or later dumping is inevitable).

I use limiters - symmetrical lock and timely withdrawal of funds.
1...406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420...523
New comment
Reason: