**Steinitz** Method Revealed Here - page 86
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
light bulb over head goes on!
I've been re-reading some of the earlier posts, & it's just dawned on me that I might not be using this method "correctly", But my way seems to work.
So I thought I would post it for anyone who is having difficulty with this system & wants to try it from another angle:
I use 30M time frame,
I look for the top TF (Daily) to be Red & the 3 below it to be all Blue
then, when the bottom turns Red, I enter short & exit after 25 pips
If I can babysit it I will put a 15 pip trailing stop
reverse above for longs.
sometimes I use a 30 pip s/loss, but I'm experimenting with that still,
I'm getting about 70% success at the moment but only done 10 trades
well looks like iGOR just handed steinitz the "death blow" to his method and ea. now what?
Igor has not handed me anything. He is right about the way candles and HAS bar's are looked at. That was never the issue. In a back test I believe you can set the tester to look at "tick by tick" which is stored in history. That will emulate perfectly the way it would look going forward.
The issue is not the backtest at all. In fact we are not claiming the back test was so wonderful. To the contrary. The issue is TF's looked at for initiating an entry. Some people feel that any TF over 4hrs is too long and not relevent for day trading.
I have looked at the backtest where we have 20:1 winning trades. The problem is the 1 large DD closed loss. It wipes out much of the profit. I'm not willing to throw it out to the wolves and claim it's ready to go. I demand better.
I am asking for members to step forward if they want to look at what we have put together and see if they can find something that could improve the EA. I don't need any help from anyone unless you has specificallhy a vast knowledge of MQL coding.
I don't need people like TN and SF to drop in with baited breath and make some ignorant remark. If anybody wants to spend much of their day moderating a thread and putting together tons of hours developing you are welcome to post what you have so we can critque your ideas. If you don't want to contribute in a positive way then go away and play on the freeway......
Dear Steinitz,
I know enough people that could give you ALL the help it needs to programm anything you want.
BUT you start of from the wrong foot.
It looks like you don't to see the initial problem that makes this system NOT TRADEBLE.
It is not a matter of looking or programing to look to the "tick by tick".
And even less the big losses one can be faced with because the system doesn't want to turn
If you REALY want to be HELPED and REALY want to listen come to skype and contact me under the name FXigor and I gonna explain to you.
I'm 10 years programming and develloping systems so I know what I'm talking about ( don't want to sound cocky--realy not)...
friendly regards...iGoR
Igor,
Do you trade a system that is viable? What makes you think the Steinitz method is not tradeable? It seems to be there, albeit I don't have the backtesting records Steinitz does.
Kind regards,
Al
Igor,
Do you trade a system that is viable? What makes you think the Steinitz method is not tradeable? It seems to be there, albeit I don't have the backtesting records Steinitz does.
Kind regards,
---------------------------------------
Igor: Hello!
Your comments on Steinitz syestem, I was unable to follow.
As you know, some professsional traders are mainly using multi time frames, as their main trading strategy, and trading successfully!
I remembered well, Even in your case as well, you follow 5 min trend to take the trade on 1 min (MULTI TIME BASED STRATEGY).
So, may I ask you one question in this regard!
Conept wise, How your sytem is different than Steintz's?
If you also think, Price action is much more important than any of the indicators.
I think this is system, which is based on multi time frames(Steinitz's), which is close to follw the price action.
Besides, Steinitz syestem is simple to follw to TRADE.
In my case, until now in my trading, Steinitz system is producing cosistent results!
With regards,
rswamy4449
Scalping Method Announcement
Hello......
I am on vacation in the state of Washington and communicating with Lee. After exhaustive testing with the "Scalping Method" we have come to the conclusion that an exit strategy to prevent the occasional loss (large) wasn't good enough to make this EA overall a profitable one. I knew in the back of my mind that by entering on a counter move it was risky but I had to see for myself if it could be profitable overall.
I am disappointed as Lee is that even with so many profitable closed trades that rare trade that was no doubt the end of one cycle and the beginning of another was too hard to control with multiple exit strategies.
We are moving ahead with the BEST for LAST. We started out with a functional alert for the "Original Method" that was completed weeks ago. We are finishing up on the EA for it now. It is actually about 80% finished. It will be tested of course to exam it's profitability. I am more hopeful with this approach since we enter in the beginning of a trend (1 to 4 TF bars, user adjustable).
Basically, we get in the beginning of a trend as opposed to a counter trend. I believe we will easily see profit from the onset and the challenge will be how to exit and when. I am prepared for that and it is being coded right now in the EA. I have all sorts of exits planned out and will beta test each one.
In fact 98% of the emails I received so far are from people who have/are using the "Original Method".
So in closing I am offering the "Scalping Method" fully functional EA to members onlywho PM me and describe to me their MQL experience and why they should receive a copy (free) to experiment with. I ONLY ask that if they are successful in making the EA profitable to send me a copy to look over.
I will be spending the next week with Lee on the "Original Method" which by all accounts is making money for the vast number of readers. Just look at the polls to see that it has value.
Igor,
Do you trade a system that is viable? What makes you think the Steinitz method is not tradeable? It seems to be there, albeit I don't have the backtesting records Steinitz does.
Kind regards,
---------------------------------------
Igor: Hello!
Your comments on Steinitz syestem, I was unable to follow.
As you know, some professsional traders are mainly using multi time frames, as their main trading strategy, and trading successfully!
I remembered well, Even in your case as well, you follow 5 min trend to take the trade on 1 min (MULTI TIME BASED STRATEGY).
So, may I ask you one question in this regard!
Conept wise, How your sytem is different than Steintz's?
If you also think, Price action is much more important than any of the indicators.
I think this is system, which is based on multi time frames(Steinitz's), which is close to follw the price action.
Besides, Steinitz syestem is simple to follw to TRADE.
In my case, until now in my trading, Steinitz system is producing cosistent results!
With regards,
rswamy4449Hi rswamy and zebra,
I have explained the problem thoroughly in this posting:
https://www.mql5.com/en/forum
Read my postings again. Not a quick read but thorougly also and you will understand.
The problem has nothing to do with trading from different time frames. The problem is using MTF indicators.
The problem that you will be faced with is that if you trade according the rules (taking in a position when a certain amount of ribbons of the indicator lign up )(meaning a certain amount of time frames) that it will give you winning trades but off course also losing trades.
At the end of the day when you finshed trading and you close your platform and re-open your platform you will notice that the signals that were given to you, the signals that leaded to profit will still be there.
The signals that leaded to losses will not be there anymore. Call it repainted.
The bigger or the more time frames you include in taking in your positions the bigger that problem will be or the more you will see that the losing trades disapear.
Taking in trades (pulling the trigger) is one of the hardest thing to do in trading. If you would be faced severall times with this problem ( that at the end of the day you end up with for ex. 2 winning trades and 2 losing trades and that you took in according the signals that were given to you. At the end of the day you restart your platform and the system makes you believe IT had only 2 trades, 2 winning trades and the signals that caused the losing trades are not there anymore, well I ask myself how frustrated you will feel and how easy it is going to be for you to take in the next day the next trades.
If this happens to you severall days in a row I can garantee you that you will feel that this system or any other system that is based on MTF indicators is NOT TRADEBLE.
After re-starting your platforms AT THE END of the trading day, the system is going to make you believe that it had only winning trades (because of this "repainting" element) BUT DURING that day you end with 50% winning trades and 50% losing trades.
If one looks over historical data it looks all great and gives amazing results because of that repainting element.
In live trading it is a compleet different story.
You don't have to believe me or accept my explenation. BUT if you don't, do at least the test so you convince yourselfs.
Start your platforms in the morning +/- opening UK session. Take severall pairs.
Everytime a entry occurs according the rules place a red vertical line to go short or a green vertical line to long. Place a blue line were you need to exit accoring the rules.
Then write down the profits and losses you have made.
Next day re-start your platforms. And look back over your vertical lines.
You will notice that the signals or setups that leaded to losses are not there anymore.
BUT you would have those losses if traded with real money.
How good will you feel you have to trade this way with real money.
Lets say that I have a trading room were I call live trades. So you follow the entrys that I call live in that room.
At the end of the day you say to me...Igor my results are not that bad but also not that good.
I ask you why ??...
You say: well igor you called 4 trades today. 2 winning trades and 2 losing trades.
What would your reaction be if I tell you: NOOO I did great, the 2 winning trades I took them on my REAL account and the 2 losing trades I took them on my demo account....?!?!...
And what if I would tell you this crapy story 4 days in a row ??......
Again check it out for yourselfs instead of waiting for steinitz to do all the work. Write down on paper or excel every entry that occurs this week. Write down the losses you make and the profits.
At the end of THIS week compare your results with the results that the system shows you at the END of this week.
good luck...iGoR
Confused?
Hi Everyone
I've been following this with a great deal of interest and I am now up and running with the indicators. There seems to be much debate and from it all I have a question ... if you consider the 5 min and 15 min indicator strip running on a 5 min window ... both strips produce a new box every 5 minutes so every 3rd box marks the end of a 5 min bar and a 15 min bar ... so possibly we could have two blue boxes in the 15 min strip followed by a red box - so if looking to go long surely it is only the last box in the 15 min strip that is meaningful since this marks the end of the 15 min timeframe? That being the case you cannot take a signal (5 min strip and 15 min strip being in agreement) until after the 3rd box is generated ... i.e at the end of a 15 min time slice ... so a signal in agreement can only be taken at a 15 min interval.
Hope that is sort of clear - please believe me I'm not trying to knock anything just trying to fully understand what I am seeing?
Thanks
Paul
Why does this happen?
I'm using HAS Bar versions:
N4 TF HAS Bar
N4 TF HAS Bar2
which I believe are the current versions updated by Lee. The upper timeframe bars do not appear to update properly. Compare the difference between the HAS Bars on the two charts. Chart 1 is after my platform had been running for a number of hours; chart 2 after I switched to a 30M chart then back to 15M.
Notice the difference in the HAS Bars. Why does this happen?
Chase