THE 2007 TRADING CHAMPIONSHIP! - page 8

New comment
 
What I would VERY much like is to increase the maximum number of open positions to at least 8-10.
 
I'm the same way... I've been grumbling about it since last year :) If they give a chance to work on 12 pairs, three orders is too tight for them...
 
That's why I propose limiting the risk for all participants to a reasonable 5-10%, but removing restrictions on the number of trades and lots. By risk I mean the percentage ratio of the current drawdown to the current balance. Thus we will eliminate guessing of the risk, as well as aggression. The contest will become closer to real trading, i.e. the trading culture will be ensured. The winners will be the experts, with the help of which it will be possible to trade in the real world.
In case of exceeding the risk limit, disqualification.
Naturally, the organizers have the possibility to accept the experts. The Championship will not be attended by the robbers that place/modify their orders every minute.
 
Arkadiy:
Valmars:
Arkadiy:

30% or 50% is a small difference.

So, how about a Risk limit instead of 5 lots and 3 trades?
And is it realistic to trace the Risk limit from the organizers?
When investing the same amount of money in trades by different EAs, only smart EAs will win. This will add flexibility in distribution of trades and funds on one currency pair and in portfolio trading.

Very simple ! We have Equiti as well as the amount of collateral margin at any given time. It should not exceed the maximum allowed percentage. If it is exceeded, one of the positions (for example, the most unprofitable) is closed automatically. If we have more (or a similar situation occurs again), the next position is closed.
Equiti - there is real money in the account and depending on it we can risk a certain amount (% of Equiti).

Probably, the risk should be understood as the possibility of losing a certain amount of the current balance (not equity). This is where the difficulty of calculating this amount arises.
There are no difficulties if the margin call is 70%-75%. All unprofitable positions will be closed involuntarily if the margin level falls below the specified value. The deposit itself remains afloat. But for those who are not accustomed to place stops, such a forced stop will work.

To my mind, the high percentage margin call is the most effective way to bring the strategies of the Championship participants to a civil basis. On the one hand, accounts do not fall out, but on the other hand, wretched strategies based on luck practically lose all chances to survive without losing until the winning end.

And all the other restrictions only harm the trading. For example, I prefer to reverse on double counter with further closing by OrderCloseBy(), because it is very fast and fast. And if there is a limit on the number of lots, this method can't always be applied. Well, let's say I have a position open with 2 lots, and the limit is 5. Then in order to reverse, I would need to open 4 lots more and that would bring the total to 6 lots, which does not fit the rules. I would have to close one position, then wait until the trade flow is released and open the opposite one. And the code turns out to be much longer and more complicated, and the efficiency decreases, because the price from the moment of closing one position to the moment of opening the other one may go absolutely wrong.

In short, all restrictions except for high margincall percentage level should be removed, so that strategies have possibilities for mobility of various tricks, but with reduced risk limit.
 
Even with a 100% margin call, there will still be aggressors. Already at the start will go in-bank on half of the deposit. This leaves the possibility of luck or bad luck, i.e. eagle-reckoning.
 

Or maybe, when determining the winner, apply a formula in which
calculates the risk of the deals made.
Such techniques are used by some companies in
competitions.
And the winner would not necessarily be the one who has the highest balance,
but the one who has both: the minimum risk and the balance among the leaders of the contest.
In this case, it seems to me, we can remove restrictions on the number of open orders
, and on the level of margin call, and not to limit the number of trades per contest.
Everyone will understand that they will not be able to win by leaps and bounds, and will choose an acceptable option for themselves.

 
If you calculate the risk at the end of the championship, then maybe someone got lucky and didn't have big drawdowns even though he went all-in. That after that he is a winner? Therefore, limiting the risk for everyone at the beginning gives equal opportunities, and the greatest balance wins.
 
I think a smaller leverage (like 1:10) and a higher margin call (70-80%) would be enough. IMHO.
 
Arkadiy писал (а):
If you calculate the risk at the end of the championship, then maybe someone got lucky and didn't have big drawdowns even though he went all-in. That after that he is a winner? Therefore, limiting the risk for all at the beginning gives equal opportunities, and the greatest balance wins.
I agree with risk limitation.
Didn't write about it, but implied and plus the whole calculation
(risk+balance ratio) at the end of the championship.
 

I don't think there will be anything to calculate at the end. The greatest balance will win. With a lot of capital and little risk, the noteworthy experts will be visible to the naked eye. They will have to make a lot of profitable deals in order to achieve the desired effect and to build up a considerable capital. At low risk, there is no possibility to make 5-6 very large deals (va-bank) and win the Championship.
There is no doubt that with a huge number of deals the losing EAs will also be visible.

12345678910
New comment