learn how to earn money villagers [Episode 2] ! - page 375
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
I love statements like that ...
Sounds like a song to my heart: "... overturningAntimartin. Will double the depo on a flat or sideways with some critical amplitude for the advisor."
A dream...
I know your area of interest. All loss-making EAs should be inverted. You should at least post some results, stats or images. But it's just not interesting any more - the "statistics of results" is getting boring).
Your area of interest is known to me. All loss-making EAs should be inverted. At least for once you would have posted some results, stats or pictures. But it's just not interesting any more - the "statistics of results" is too annoying).
But why...?
Not so long ago, one friend of mine gave me a file with statistics of a series of losing trades in a tester... He also demanded to demonstrate how reversal of trades can make this series profitable. I don't think anyone reported any error found in my file.
And you must have got pains from the fact that you have not noticed the conclusions that follow from the facts I cite:
- If you follow certain rules, it is IMPOSSIBLE (!) to lose on Forex;
- If the statistics of results of the TS used is consistently positive by results of series of trades of some length, you trade by it and - "good luck";
- If the statistics of results of the TS used is stably negative by results of series of transactions of some length, you reverse the direction of transactions, ... if you wish, include compensation of spread influence by means of management of volumes of positions and - again "in the good";
- If the statistics of the results of the used TS is stably wobbling around the horizontal axis of the chart, you trade on a "return to zero" and are again "swimming in happiness".
It would be very surprising to meet a trader who would get a hangnail from such conclusionsWhy not...?
As for the third point, the increase in volume will definitely not compensate for losses in spread, rather the opposite, the system will start to drain faster.
On the first sentence:
...
- there you go... you're "in the same place"
Where? Where is that "brake" in a man that makes him stop at the word "failure" ... and not take the next step?
If your system is capable of losing, it means you have the Grail in your hands
... Flip the trades - and you will just as inevitably get double your starting amount.
=========================
Regarding the "running away" trawl...
I agree with any feature that either gives stability to the results of TC on series of a certain length, or does not destroy the stability of the existing one.
For in this case, miscellaneous-features in principle - do not change anything. They can only increase the "output" of TC, which, of course, is nice in itself.
If your system is capable of losing, it means you have the Grail in your hands ... Flip the trades and you will just as inevitably get double your starting amount.
Why is that...?
Not too long ago a comrade threw a file here for me with Statistics of the outcome of a losing series of trades from the tester... He also demanded to demonstrate how a reversal of deals could make this series profitable. I don't think anyone reported any error found in my file.
And you must have got pains from the fact that you have not noticed the conclusions that follow from the facts I cite:
- If you follow certain rules, it is IMPOSSIBLE (!) to lose on Forex;
- If the statistics of results of the TS used is consistently positive by results of series of trades of some length, you trade by it and - "good luck";
- If the statistics of results of the TS used is stably negative by results of series of transactions of some length, you reverse the direction of transactions, ... if you wish, include compensation of spread influence by means of management of volumes of positions and - again "in the good";
- If the statistics of the outcome of the used TS is stable around the horizontal axis of the chart, you trade on "return to zero" and again "bathe in chocolate".
It would be very surprising to meet a trader who would get a hangnail from such conclusions.As far as I know you don't have an adviser for your strategy, which means you cannot confirm your conclusions. You can fantasize a lot, but practice has always been the criterion of truth. Those who aren't programmers are always pregnant with a bunch of their fantasies, which they cannot either confirm or refute. But the one who is a programmer, can always quickly check ideas arising in his mind by making an advisor. Therefore, programmers with such experience, for the most part, are always skeptical of non-programmers' fantasies. But programmers have more trust in experienced traders who can confirm their successful trading results with shares. However, in this case, the trader is often unable to express his or her algorithm clearly, since some trading moments are based on intuition and there is no possibility to put them into code.
Probably you have heard more than once, that it is difficult to find a system that only produces losses, as well as those that only produces earnings. Apart from theoretical conclusions, have you tried turning it over in practice?
So that's what it's all about!..!
As you can see, the point of my objections is precisely to fight against frivolous claims of draining the TS under discussion. Give me a leaking TS, and I'll owe you a cup of
... (or else, molding, at every word "leaking,... leaking...)
(about practice - in reply to colleaguekhorosh)
So that's what it's all about!..!
As you can see, the point of my objections is precisely to fight against frivolous claims of draining the TS under discussion. Give me a leaking TS, and I'll owe you a cup ... (or else, molding, at every word "flush, ... flush ...)
(about practice - in reply to colleaguekhorosh)
(In answer to colleague khorosh...).
As far as I know you don't have an advisor for your strategy, so you can't confirm your conclusions. You can fantasise a lot, but practice has always been the criterion of truth. Those who aren't programmers are always pregnant with a lot of their fantasies, which they cannot either confirm or refute. But the one who is a programmer, can always quickly check ideas arising in his mind by making an advisor. Therefore, programmers with such experience, for the most part, are always skeptical of non-programmers' fantasies. But programmers have more trust in experienced traders who can confirm their successful trading results with shares. Although, in this case, the trader is often not able to clearly describe his/her algorithm, because some points of trading are based on intuition, and there is no opportunity to put them into code.
Of course, there is no Expert Advisor
... But I cannot find an Expert Advisor, because there are no strategies with guaranteed drawbacks around me.
And for words about "inventing" - you'd better answer
,... because you can't PRACTICE simultaneously (!) open two positions for one instrument in opposite directions ... and then, simultaneously, close them, making a profit on one of them,not equal to the loss on the other, minus two spreads
(the nonsense about slippage and other stuff - do not offer)
Well, when you finish your unsuccessful attempts to solve this case, you may think: Why is it that you, an experienced programmer, suddenly failed to do "such a trifle"...
Maybe because 2+2=4 regardless of the programmer's opinion...?