Is martin so bad? Or do you have to know how to cook it? - page 30
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 won't go into it for free. If you're interested, write to me in person, I can explain for fifty bucks.
No thanks. I have proved myself wrong and do not need any help from outsiders, especially for money. It is ridiculous to offer, even for fifty bucks, proof that the system is not working. I hope that's a joke. How did you imagine that in the first place? I will send you $50 via Web Money or wire transfer, and then you tell me on Skype that Gerchik or Bill Williams said that professionals do not use Martingale? Or show me a couple of examples of losing on a random prediction and a $500 deposit... And if I'm not satisfied with the reasoning? Will I find contradictions or simply cannot not find them in principle?
I will give my evidence in the open and for free when the time comes, I can ease your task and not prove your thesis, but at least try to refute mine, or my proof, then we'll see who is "crooked" and who the finger.
We can continue the logic and come to the conclusion that there are no flat strategies on the market because the price never rises to the mean value, or that there are no "attractors", "levels", etc. But that is not the case.
Martingale works great for rebounding TPs and bad for trending ones, for the simple reason that it is based on the assumption of a pullback. Now reasoning further and examining the statistics of the market being in a trend and flat state, we come to the conclusion that 15/85% on average is the ratio. That is, the pullback systems are more than 5 times more reliable than the trend ones. And Martin works in the plus side with probability (1- 1/ 5.6). This is very rough reasoning, but nevertheless it is correct.
When trend is recognized, trend methods are switch on, when the flat methods are switch on, therefore, we may work with trend by the principle of "antimartingale" and martingale on the flat where it is profitable. No one is forcing us to work directly.
I`m confused by too emotional cries of the majority who are losing money anyway because a deposit of less than 10K $ is too risky, there is no margin of safety, besides, as a rule, a strictly trend or strictly flat strategy is used, of course an average spread is losing and no MM will not help in this case.
What will you do if I prove that using a martin is at least inefficient?
You do realise that the concept of "trend" and "flat" is very heuristic. It can be defined very differently, e.g. by summing bars with Kaufman's efficiency coefficient greater than some threshold. Either the sum of the ratio of Momentum sums to the sum ofabsolute Momentumvalues for a certain period, or averages of such for several periods, etc. Various estimates range from 30\70 to 5\95. And SB's is 50/50.
I don't have the data to correlate traders who use martin profitable and losers. I think you do not have it either, because there is no access to it even for brokerage company employees, traders do not broadcast data about using one or another strategy at any given time and it does not make sense to try to compare without it.
I asked for statistical proof and apart from youtube video, emotions, rhetoric and fiction I have not heard anything. I have very different conclusions. If you want to challenge it, you must prove it according to all the rules of scientific truth debate, without tricks and demagoguery ("...we owe you all a forum...") I perceive such rhetoric as noise, sorry.
Thesis:Martingale may be the best MM choice, in the rather broad context of the flat strategy space.
No thanks. I've proved myself wrong and I don't need any help, especially not for money. It's ridiculous to offer, even for fifty bucks, proof that the system isn't working. I hope that's a joke. How did you imagine that in the first place? I will send you $50 via Web Money or wire transfer, and then you tell me on Skype that Gerchik or Bill Williams said that professionals do not use Martingale? Or show me a couple of examples of losing on a random prediction and a $500 deposit... And if I'm not satisfied with the reasoning? Will I find contradictions or simply cannot not find them in principle?
I will give my evidence in the open and for free when the time comes, I can ease your task and not prove your thesis, but at least try to refute mine, or my proof, then we'll see who is "crooked" and who the finger.
All the martinophiles may be surely referred to zeroes, the probability of making a mistake is close to zero.
Dear Z Expert, what principle of MM you use in your PAMM?
At the moment you have a 60% drawdown of equity, how is it better than averaging? (I will not show you pictures, otherwise you may be regarded as advertising).
And the profits are zero for the month. WITH RESPECT.
The price does not move during a flat, so where does the profit come from?)
A 50-60 point sideways move is enough and you can make money on it, not as much as on a trend, but something without a drawdown. How do you understand that the price does not move? It has not moved at all? Is the market dead?
This is not a flat, a flat I would say moves in a narrower sideways direction and how can one profit if it suddenly ends up with martingale)
And who prevents you from reversing the martin at the breakdown of a level or at another correction? Calculate all the risks for the maximum drawdown, of course you should not martinate by a factor of two in any case.
The ratio should be dynamic and depend on the probability of a price reversal for a correction.
By EurUsd in 208-2009 one can easily pass through 1500 points trends, with a drawdown, but still pass and gain a deserved profit. And so the usual working range of 400-600 pips is quite comfortable and profitable.