Avalanche - page 440
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
Let me disagree with you. I just don't want the topic to sink into history, because new people are coming and they're not likely to poke around.
I agree, no need to dig... In that case, share on your own part the insights (without repeating the content of the branch), interesting points, stats from the real world, problematic issues, etc. Otherwise you are busy masturbating, like in that bearded anecdote, when someone with a candle in his hands in the dark came out on the circus stage and started jerking off, all around silence, rustling dresses, barely audible whisper of the audience... Suddenly someone says in a loud voice - look...!!!, he's just a dumb jerk off... That man in the arena: FFFFF... on the candle... (candle goes out) WHO'S HERE???
P.S. Enjoy your sandwich under the blanket.
Please advise how to get out of a full lock in the following situation - just don't say it's silly etc., it really is.
From the current price at a distance of 10 pips up, 4 buy orders are placed, 4 sell orders are placed at a distance of 10 pips down. Each successive order is 10 pips away from the previous one. The order nearest to the price is 1 lot, then 2 lots, then 4 lots and finally 8 lots. We obtain a completely symmetrical grid at the maximum distance from the price with orders of 8 lots each.
Let us consider that the price goes down at first, opened all 4 orders, but didn't reach the TP for the sell, turned around and went up. The price went upwards, too, and opened all 4 orders, which means a full break-out occurred. The question is how one can withdraw from the lock, taking into account the fact that when all 8 positions are open, there is very little free money. Thanks in advance.
it's not exactly an avalanche, but it looks like something. the only problem is. You need to get at least 0 out in a situation like this, if possible.
I started a new topic, it was advised to ask here.
The advise was good: to open an order with 1 lot in the direction the price turned, i.e. in my example downwards, then close all three trades with 1 lot to nil. Other options were advised, but so confusing that I did not understand them.
If possible, then small adjustments can be made to the TS so that loca does not arise, although I doubt that is possible. thanks in advance for your reply.
The solution has already been found. It is described in details in the topic, in brief: we wait for the price to move beyond the corridor at any distance, close all profitable orders on this side of the corridor and place one straight (...Stop) pending order of the same direction at a small distance from the price. The volume of a new order should be equal to the volume of closed profitable orders. If the price reverses and it moves in the opposite direction, a new pending order that didn't work should be moved after the price. This decreases losses of open orders on the opposite side of the corridor, a part of profit has already been fixed and if the price reverses again and a new pending order opens, the corridor between orders will be smaller. You can repeat the reset until the corridor is completely destroyed and all orders close in profit.
Have you tried putting a note on the log: My friend.
If you're lazy, maybe some tea will bring...
I agree, dig in and don't have to.... In that case, share your own insights from your side (without repeating the content of the branch), interesting points, stats from the real world, problematic issues, etc. Otherwise you are busy masturbating, like in that bearded anecdote, when someone with a candle in his hands in the dark came out on the circus stage and started jerking off, all around silence, rustling dresses, barely audible whisper of the audience... Suddenly someone loudly says - look...!!!!, he's just a dumb jerk off... That man in the arena: FFFFF... on the candle... (candle goes out) WHO'S HERE???
P.S. Enjoy your sandwich under the blanket.
The solution has already been found, it's called repositioning. It is described in details in the topic, in brief: we wait for the price to move beyond the band at any distance, close all profitable orders on this side of the band and place one straight (... Stop) pending order of the same direction at a small distance from the price. The volume of a new order should be equal to the volume of closed profitable orders. If the price reverses and it moves in the opposite direction, a new pending order that didn't work should be moved after the price. This decreases losses of open orders on the opposite side of the corridor, a part of profit has already been fixed and if the price reverses again and a new pending order opens, the corridor between orders will be smaller. You can repeat the reset until the corridor is fully destroyed and all orders close in profit.
This solution will not always work in practice (most probably it will not work), but that is not what I meant to say.
The grail is the ability to take a losing trade to zero. - that's all.
Example open 2 transactions (without stops) on one triggered profit +30pp., and the second went into minus (using overlaps, additional orders, etc.) after some time (unlimited) brought to zero (including swaps). Then we opened 3 trades, 2 of them were winning - the loss-making one was taken to zero. What we have left - only profit. There are such algorithms (at least I have them).
Here's an example of the pound/dollar. Not a single currency pair (including problematic ones) produces losses.
here's the euro/dollar.
We have already found the solution, it is called a reset. It is described in details in the topic, in brief: we wait for the price to move beyond the corridor at any distance, close all profitable orders on this side of the corridor and place one straight (...Stop) pending order of the same direction at a small distance from the price. The volume of a new order should be equal to the volume of closed profitable orders. If the price reverses and it moves in the opposite direction, a new pending order that didn't work should be moved after the price. This decreases losses of open orders on the opposite side of the corridor, a part of profit has been already blocked and if the price reverses again and a new pending order opens, the corridor between orders will be smaller. You can repeat the reset until the corridor is completely destroyed and all orders close in profit.
And what if the price increases the corridor, hitting the ...Stop and immediately turns around to the middle level? What to do in such a case? Wait again for the price to move beyond the boundaries?
Greetings! I have nothing to share yet. I have spent three days on this thread but the trolls have done their job and blown my mind.
Read carefully from the first post on this page - a lot will become clear...
What if the price widens the corridor, hitting the ...Stop, and immediately reverses towards the middle of the level? What to do in such a case? Wait again for the price to move out of the bounds?
Then no deposit will be enough, because, by definition, the move is done when the ... crept up with everything close, so... either... or... :-)))
Read carefully from the first post of this page - a lot will become clear...
Attentive. Only, someone seems to have a problem with "attentive".
It may not be treatable.