Avalanche - page 270

New comment
 
lasso >>:


Для меня очевидно другое. Человек профитно торгующий восемь лет не может не знать элементарных закономерностей.
При снижении значения профитных сделок с 50% до тех же 40% изменяется сам характер распределения серий.

Привожу статистику распределения по выборке 30 000. На ней же тестировался Лябушер. ))
Видим как резко возрастает колво убыточных серий.
Только не надо говорить, что Вы их разрываете профитными в несколько пипсов. Не смешите публику.



График баланса страшно выкладывать. Просадки такие!!!, что самого баланса даже не видно.
Но в конце все заканчивается хэппи-эндом, все как и гарантирует по своему опыту, наставник юнных трейдеров, Олег.
Вопрос только в том, что до него никто не доживет (до хэппиэнда) кроме него самого.


Of course I am, there are other things to do. For particularly talented people, I repeat once again that you have a head on your shoulders that would not allow such series. Read it carefully. I've written a hundred times that the MM selected for TC. It's on the TS that everything will depend. And the fact that with a decrease in the percentage of profitable trades naturally increases the probability of a greater number of losing streaks is clear. Are you trying to be funny? In theory you can find parameters for any TS where there will be a loss. For me it is much easier to trade on a Martin. It is also much easier to design a system for a margin.

If I'm not mistaken, I don't know whether I'm going to cheat on my trading robot or not.) (Astrakhan and Lubushev's models show that it's all a lost cause and you don't have to trade.) (Looking at your pictures on the urgent need to withdraw all deposits, and quit forex))))

4 and 10 trades on the Laboucher will give a profit. On stab lot nada will be 6. 40 out of 100 trades on läbucher will give a profit. If you had a series of 1000000 trades and said ... see, there were 3000 losing trades in a row on a stub lot)) Why is it so hard to do? On a stub lot, the distribution is exactly the same. So there will be an instant loss. Why are you giving me the drawdowns? You're saying there's no drawdown on a stub lot? I don't think we should use slippage and so on... but we should use our forex instead of imitating random openings from the street. If you do not know how to use TDS, you may use some simple trading strategies that do not depend on the conditions of the chosen order. But if 4 transactions out of 10 will already bring profit, and not 6 transactions, it is clear to me that achieving 4 is much easier than 6 transactions. Or is it? And 40 out of 100 is easier to achieve than 51?

And also on your tests of distributions... as I said before with any MM system, you are losing money. On a martin, on a stab lot, or on a laboucher. I think they are detached from the real market. If you say so there is no profit TP in principle. In theory you can find an allocation that any MM and absolutely any TS will fail. Theoretically, you can find a situation where you will have one thousand losing trades in a row and say "it pisses".
What don't you understand? Do you deny that 4 out of 10 gives a profit? And that 4 is easier to reach than 6? And hence, it would be easier to create a system that would give profits on a Laboucher. Theoretically, if the probability is different from 0, it can happen. Therefore we can theoretically say that 1000 trades in a row can be unprofitable. So it's a loser everywhere. The way I see it, you're all losing. If we are dealing with 4 profits out of 10, and not 6, then with a more or less sane TS it will be easier to profit than with a fixed lot. Any way you slice it, it's easier to reach 4 profitable than 6. The rest is up to TS. But obviously, if for profit nada only 4 out of 10 instead of 6, then this TS may be simpler and easier to create. And don't give me your distribution, it's a loser everywhere. If I'm wrong, let those who are good at maths correct me, but as far as I know, according to probability theory, any event can happen, the probability of which is different from 0. And I think the more trades you take in a series, the more likely it will be to have, say, 500 losing trades in a row. Or am I wrong??? According to your distribution the probability of losing may fall and TS which gives 99% of profitable trades, and in which the profit is 5 times higher than the stop. Take a series of 10000000000 and run a thousand in a row losing trades. This distribution turned out to be a losing TS that gives 99% of profitable trades. And the wise conclusion - to pamoyku this lousy TS for mercilessly drains from the distribution. I got tired of this argument about nothing. I like it. I like it. I'm not going to prove anything to anyone...already sick of it. I'm so sure that if the profit can be achieved at 4, rather than 6 transactions, then create a profitable TS will be easier. I do not care about all your theoretical distributions ... your theories and harmful to live because you can die. That's it. So I'm stopping this pointless argument... who wants to trade the way you do... I don't want to trade in the forex market. Let me take my leave.

ZS. With Lunatic created the topic, moogarych for what I thread up with the third page)).
 
Svinozavr >>:
Да ладно - в запале и на систему нападали, хотя она, конечно, не при чем. Чё уж там... было... ))) Но не у всех ведь железная выдержка - автор своей инопланетной арифметикой даже земную мумию до истерики доведет. )))


Let's be honest. There is no system in Avalanche as such. It's a random opening where all the hope is that the depot will survive a flat. What kind of system is there? The trades are off the books. There is no system. Conclusion. There is nothing to criticize in principle))) In general, all my disputes were about dumb maths lunatic topikstarter, and the feasibility of locs, and not about Avalanche itself as they say it is a system of opening / closing trades ... The fact that the opening from a torch fails, I'm personally convinced of it. And what kind of criticism is that of pseudostim. The author here can't prove that 2+2=4. But to criticize the system from the viewpoint of the reasons of opening / closing, well, that there was a system that would make a decision about the opening / closing trades, and not just from a torch ... well, it's a lost cause, maybe I'm in the fever of dispute forgotten but I do not categorically remember that I criticized Lavina exactly as a system)))

By the way I will say that in a market like now Lavina just should not work badly. For the movements are not bad. What Avalanche likes. The currencies may move by hundreds of pips within a couple of hours, just the market where the Avalanche opens from the street can work well. But when the market starts to flat in a narrow corridor, this will be...shit. Look at the quotations for 2002,03,04. They were so flat there in the corridor of 30 pips, it was horrible. And this "shifting the channel" thing that they have invented would not work there because the volatility was very low, not like now. It went 50 pips by that time and it was not a bad move...and then it flew again. The channel strategies definitely ruled back then.
 
I'm not the only midnight owl, by the way))
 
In fact, I don't give a shit about this distribution. Take the daily and throw in an SSI with a period of 44. That's 6 signals since last May. Stop on the opposite signal. That's only 6 stops in a year. On a martin, even a 1000 pips stop on a small starting lot is nothing compared to the time you gain lots and a 20 pips stop will cost you more money than 1000 pips on a small starting lot. I've had 6 stops in a whole year. I may be scalping on the daily signal on the minute, making 50 trades a day. If I make a mistake, I simply wait...a day or two...not to infinity, but to the reversal on the daily signal. I grab a stop, increase a lot and then make a lot of deals in the direction of the daily signal, sometimes by intuition I catch pullbacks and then go back to the next stop. My logic is simple - either I make a stop, or the price returns and goes in profit. And there are only 6 stops in a year! That's the reason there will be very few stops, and the main problem with martin is lot gain, the number of stops or lousy distribution. I have 99% of profitable trades. Where am I on 6 stops a year going to get a lousy series? You are all so smart with the distribution, it is not clear that you can get screwed on the martin, as well as on a stable lot and get screwed even faster. And the number of stops for a martin is the worst, because the lots starts to wind up. If you do not know how to do this, you cannot do it on your own. I also got 30,000 a year with 6 stops and 29,994 profit trades. I do not know what to do with them, I do not know what to do with them. Stop counting that crap in excel. Take the chart and put SSI 44 on the days and make sure you count it, there's only 6 stops a year coming out. I don't even know how I can get 6 stops a year into the bullshit distribution you counted in those 30,000 thousand trades? Tell me, how am I supposed to get into that bullshit you got going on all year with 6 stops? I'd need 30,000 thousand years of trading to get the number of stops you got in those 30,000,000 trades.
 
E_mc2 >>:
Да и вообще какал я на это распределение. ВОзьмите дневки и киньте ССИ с периодом 44. Это с мая прошлого года 6 сигналов. Стоп по обратному сигналу. Это всего 6 стопов в год. На мартине стоп даже в 1000 пипсов на маленький начальный лот, это мелочи в сравнение с тем когда накрутяца лоты и 20 пипс стопа по деньгам будет стоить больше чем 1000 на маленький начальный лот. У меня было 6 стопов за целый год. При том что я в сторону сигнала на дневках могу скальпировать на минутках совершая по 50 сделок в день. Если ошибся тупо сижу жду, не пересиживаю, а именно просто жду..день, два..ессно не до бесконечнсти, а до обратного сигнала на дневках. Схватил стоп, увеличил лот и дальше тупо в сторону сигнала на дневках совершаю кучу сделок, иногда тупо по интуиции ловлю откаты и с откатов опять становлюсь до следующего стопа. Логика у меня проста - либо застопит, либо цена вернёца и пойдёт в профит. А стопов таких всего 6 в год!! На то и ращёт что стопов будет очень мало, и отсекаеца основная проблема мартина накрутка лотов, на количестве стопов или паршивом распределении. У меня 99% профитных сделок. Где я на 6 стопах в год могу попасть на паршивую серию?? Такие вы все умные с этим распределением, типа не ясно что на распределении можна на мартине влететь, равно как и на стабильном лоте, ещё быстрее слить. И количество стопов для мартина это самое страшное, ибо лоты начинает накручивать. Так я ж говорил на то вам и голова на плечах что б класть на это распределение, и на количесво стопов. З0000 у него сделок..у меня тоже 30000 в год при 6 стопах и 29994 профитных сделках. Картинки блин рисует..серии у него по 30000..с кучей какого то говнораспределения, и немеряно стопов. Хватит там уже хрень в экселе считать. График возьми, да ССИ 44 кинь на дневки, и убедись, пересчитай, что там всего 6 стопов в год выходит. Я даже не представляю как я на 6 стопах в год залезу в то говнораспределение которое ты насчитал в этих 30000 тыщах сделок?? Скажи как мне имея 6 стопов за весь год попасть в тот бред который ты насчитал?? Мне что б схлопотать то количество стопов которое у тя вышло в этих 30000 тыщах сделок..нада 30000 тысяч лет торговать.

A screenshot of the signals in the studio!

 
E_mc2 >>:
..опа. Посмотрите на котиры за 2002,03,04 года. Там такие флеты были в коридорчике в 30 пипс, просто жесть. И вот эта хрень которую они придумали со сдвиганием каридора там явно бы не работала ибо там волотильность очень низкая была, не что сейчас. Там прошла 50 пипс по тем меркам уже движняк не хилый..и опять
sever29 ran an EA with the Avalanche algorithm through history from 1999 to the present day with different corridors - Avalanche was steadily gaining profits.
 
"Did you get him?" "I got him. -Who's he? -Loop!"
 
That's the thing, if I define a signal by crossing SSI with zero, as is customary, there's no way to get 6 signals. You must have your own system for detecting signals.
 
For the especially lazy, whose religion does not allow their Highness to take SIY 44 and put it on the diaries, here is a screenshot.
 
E_mc2 >>:
Для особо ленивых которым религия ихнему Высочеству не позволяет взять СИИ 44 и кинуть на дневки выкладываю скрин.

You determine signals using TrendCCI and EntryCCI. And you suggest to use CCI. It is clear that the number of signals will be different.

1...263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277...523
New comment