From theory to practice - page 1839

[Igor Makanu]

khorosh:

What takeprofit are we talking about?

for several orders (even multi-directional) you can calculate the breakeven price and set a takeprofit for all of them, for orders that are in deficit you set stop-losses at this price - I did that

the only inconvenience is when you add a new order, you have to delete all takeovers and stoplosses and re-calculate them

ZZZY: in KB there is both correct and incorrect calculation of Breakeven ;)

ZZZY: Here I found the correct calculation in version 2.0 at the bottom of the code calculationhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/code/10007

[khorosh]

Igor Makanu:

for several orders (even multi-directional) you can calculate a breakeven price and set takeprofit for all of them, for orders that are in deficit stoplosses are set at this price - I did that

the only inconvenience is when you add a new order, you have to delete all takeovers and stoplosses and re-calculate them

ZZZY: in KB there is both correct and incorrect calculation of Breakeven ;)

SZZY: Here I found a correct calculation in version 2.0 at the bottom of the code calculationhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/code/10007

I do it, but Max suggests some system without averaging. And he talks about TP of a single order. But without the averaging the take profit is often not reached if the price has gone against the position. But with averaging a profit for an aggregate position is achieved with a small price pullback.

[Maxim Kuznetsov]

Don't be fooled: averaging is a martingale, from the side. With all its effects. They (averaging and martin) are generally interchangeable because they represent the same thing.

[Igor Makanu]

Maxim Kuznetsov:

We should not indulge ourselves: averaging is a side-view martingale. With all its effects. They (averaging and martin) are generally interchangeable because they represent the same thing.

Why repeat what is written on every forum?

Especially since averaging is an "entry point shift", and martingale is the simplest management of profitability and/or system survivability.

let us consider a partial closing of an order an antimartingale, shall we? - Why should we speculate, it's simple - either up or down, or red/black - even/odd

))))

[[Deleted]]

Igor Makanu:

Why repeat what is written on every forum?

Especially since averaging is an "entry point shift", and martingale is the simplest management of profitability and/or system survivability.

let us consider partial closing of an order an antimartingale, shall we? - Why should we speculate, it's simple - either up or down, or red/black - even/odd

))))

All these tricks are designed for beginners. We'll average here, double there, partially close, then overlap. Pepper 2.0.

[Maxim Kuznetsov]

Igor Makanu:

Why repeat what is written on every forum?

Especially since averaging is an "entry point shift", and martingale is the simplest management of profitability and/or system survivability.

let us consider a partial closing of an order an antimartingale, shall we? - Why should we speculate, it's simple - go up or down and red/black - even/odd

))))

here's some marketing nonsense for you :-(

the two entities are one and the same. Absolutely. They only have a difference in the "magic bubbles" of balance sheet and equity - fix the loss/gain in balance sheet or can it in equity.

[Evgeniy Kvasov]

Maxim Kuznetsov:

Do not indulge yourself: averaging is a martingale from the side. With all of its effects. They (averaging and martin) are generally interchangeable, because they represent the same thing.

Martingale increases risk exponentially. Averaging is linear.

And on rare averages, the system is not as easy to build as on a martin.

[khorosh]

Maxim Kuznetsov:

here's some marketoid nonsense coming your way :-(

The two entities are one and the same. Absolutely. They only have a difference in the "magic bubbles" of balance sheet and equity - fix the loss/gain in balance sheet or can it in equity.

It doesn't matter what colour the cat is... and maybe you don't know how to cook it).

[Igor Makanu]

Maxim Kuznetsov:

here's some marketoid nonsense coming your way :-(.

The two entities are one and the same. Absolutely. They only have a difference in the "magic bubbles" of balance and equity - to fix the loss/gain in balance or to can in equity.

Is it better to open one order of 0.3 lots or to open 3 orders of 0.1 lot each?

is it better to close an order at once or close it partially?

I have not "got it into my head", I have already examined it all and put it all into the code. In "2 clicks" I connect the selection of the MM/order system to any indicator and I can easily see how the TS behaves with the same StopLoss and TakeProfit values with different money management systems

I don't know what to do with them, they don't know what to do with them, and they don't know what to do with them.

[khorosh]

Igor Makanu:

is it better to open one order of 0.3 lots or to open 3 orders of 0.1 lot each?

is it better to close an order at once or to close it partially?

i have not "got it", i have already examined everything and put it all into the code, in "2 clicks" i connect the selection of the MM/order system to any indicator and i can easily see how the TS behaves with the same stoplosses and takeprofs at different money management systems

There's nothing to argue about if you haven't checked it and "over there people wrote, I saw it" - you lose money not because of martin or averaging, but because of overlapping losses or lack of stoplosses in the TS

Exactly.