Counter positions: self-deception or subtle tool? - page 4

New comment
 
Swetten:

The account is the same. The account does not distinguish the TF.

I don't have the picture... but I posted it here somewhere... The lock system is practically a win-win!!! - It punctuates both trends and the TF - whatever. It starts with 2 buy-sell positions opened simultaneously, then by levels they add bai-sell again, then lots' weight and distances between them change. And all according to the system.

In the unfortunate case of an unstoppable price movement, you go to zero at a certain distance of 1000pp, for example.

 
Andrei01:
The simplest example with counter orders above.


I don't understand which is higher or lower and which example.

Can we have a more substantive conversation?

Or are you too lazy to press a few extra buttons?

 
Swetten:


I don't understand where above or below and what the example is.

Can we have a more substantive conversation?

Or are you too lazy to push a few extra buttons?

Open two counter orders and close each of them when they are in profit (i.e. at different times). Then you will get a profit proportional to the pips of each order, and when netting you will be sitting with nil (or in deficit considering the spread).
 
So? Is there a worthy opponent?
 
Andrei01:
Open two counter orders and close each of them when they are in the plus (i.e. at different times). Then you will get profit proportional to pips of each order, and at netting you will sit with nil (or in deficit considering spread).

I never said otherwise. Moreover - I support work with opposite (trailing) orders, in case you haven't noticed.
 
Andrei01:

It is easy to understand that you are wrong.

Open two counter orders and close each of them when they are in the plus (i.e. at different times). Then you will get a profit proportional to the pips of each order, and at netting you will sit with nada (or in deficit considering the spread).

Ha, so you can open 2 orders in one and the same side and also close them when both are in the plus, and then what? What's the catch? There is no trick.
 
Swetten:
So what? Do you have a worthy opponent?

Despite the fact that it is obvious that with netting the strategy's profit will in general always be less or equal than with lots, but you will not convince anyone.

Neuthing is profitable for brokerage companies and software developers, because we can save money on processing less orders.

 
Swetten:
What do you think? Will you find a worthy opponent?


I will draw my locking system in the evening - but it is for one TS, not as you have for two independent TS - in your screenshot it is the case when

Andrei01:

... You'll be sitting with zero (or in deficit considering the spread) when netting.

ZS: about netting - tried my lock system with netting - nothing worked, probably a mistake somewhere

 
Techno:
After all, you can open 2 orders in one and the same side and close them both when they are both on the plus side, and then what? What is the trick with losing lots? There is no trick.


What if the price goes the wrong way? A double loss?

And the catch is at least that, if you look closely at the picture, you can catch pullbacks without closing the main position.

I.e. at least save on the spread, not to mention the extra profit.

It seems such a simple thing, but it is obvious to few people.

 
Techno:
Ha, so you can open 2 orders in the same direction and also close them when both are in profit, and then what? What's the catch? There is no trick.
The trick is that if you open them to one side, you won't get the total zero like when netting opposing positions. And with lots you can still make double profit, even if netting will be zero. The arithmetic here is pretty straightforward.
1234567891011...29
New comment