"The 'perfect' trading system - page 11
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
Чем хорош Форекс(он этим, кстати, похож на шоу-бизнес) - что можно всё перевернуть с ног на голову и сказать что так и должно быть, а все вокруг лохи. Что в принципе тут и происходит....))))
So suckers are suckers.
So there's no point in telling suckers anything - they're going to get "screwed" anyway.
So I guess we're done here. Thank you all for your attention.
Saying it doesn't mean it is......))))) It's very often the other way round....)))))
.....You have to be "abnormal" to make money, because all the other "normal" 95% of traders successfully lose.
You have to be a little smart to make money, Victor. As strange as it may seem to you
You have to be a little smart to make money, Victor. As strange as it may seem to you.
Some of the people on this thread have a rather strange view of people - only fools and suckers around :)
>> Very strange.
Then why are you talking about your Smart guy if he has no stability?
Please understand, TRIZ fan, it is very easy to get a system with a stable loss, like yours. This is not even a result at all, because with a more or less reasonable MM it is done by a system with random entry and immediate exit (the loss - the spread per trade). But to make it a system with stable profit, a trifle according to your words, is just the most difficult thing.
Stable losses are more important than stable profits :)
Because profits can be generated randomly, for example within a few months - see trading contests.
In a competition someone always wins - it is easily simulated with PRNG - out of many trajectories, a few are always in the lead with huge profits.
However, creating a TS that is very likely to make time and depth-limited drawdowns is very difficult indeed.
If one manages to control drawdowns, one can make profits as one wishes - within reasonable limits of course.
As for the "system with stable plummet", try to make stable not some shit "with random entry and immediate exit", but at least with such profit ranges, as we have - see at the end:
PAMM
Average winning trade Average losing trade
41_GBPUSD 342.3743 -1255.6377
42_EURUSD 456.4554 -1146.0349
40_USDCHF 531.0375 -980.8858
39_EURUSD 568.9139 -1409.3125
37_GBPUSD 700.0222 -2003.5253
43_EURUSD 1351.4375 -1316.0182
38_EURUSD 1556.1354 -1335.8986
35_GBPUSD 1824.3438 -1910
34_EURUSD 2471.7015 -2530.2895
32_USDJPY 2485.436 -1930.3435
33_GBPUSD 2524.878 -2306.4706
30_GBPUSD 3495.5172 -3144.375
It's quite strange the way some of the people on this thread think about people - they're all fools and suckers around here :)
Very strange.
Yeah, and others have come up with new money called "stability" and they don't need the profit. So they play their games. It's all very strange.....)))))
Can you explain what the stability of your EA is based on? Is it based on changing trade directions (is there any correlation between them?) or on the constant excess of sl over tp? Does it have some kind of adaptability towards increasing drawdowns and decreasing profits (also behind the "adaptation period")... Why reduce tp after a profitable trade? I've read the patents whose numbers you cited in the description of the Expert Advisor (patents are certainly good (I've been doing TRIZ for 5 years myself), but to be honest, I did not really understand how they helped to develop the Expert Advisor in this case).
On everything - see General Trading Theory (GTT).
There are a million examples of TS, where the loss is greater than the target, but they do not demonstrate the stability.
There are a million other examples of TS, where the direction of trades is changing - similarly.
Therefore, an adaptive Expert Advisor works only in correlation and harmony of all components.
The target after a profitable trade is not reduced, but adapted, i.e. in general, it can change in either direction depending on what is happening in the market.
The regularity you note is a special case, on a separate time period.
Yeah, and others have invented new money called "stability" and they don't need the profits. So they play their games. It's all very strange.....)))))
You seem to have a professional habit of distorting the meaning of what you say - because there are suckers around :)
I have it the other way around - I have a presumption of high culture and reasonableness of my opponents.
True, not always my expectations are true, but I always want to believe in the best :)
Our "game" is simple - first to ensure stability, and then profitability.
It is much more difficult to ensure stability than profitability.
You seem to have a professional habit of distorting the meaning of what is said - because there are suckers around :)
I have the opposite - from the outset I assume a high culture and intelligence opponents.
True, not always my expectations are true, but I always want to believe in the best :)
Our "game" is simple - first to ensure stability, and then profitability.
Ensuring stability is much more difficult than profitability.
I understand you very well - you cannot think of anything and do everything to justify your latest, absolutely exceptional, designed precisely for these suckers, theory called
I understand you very well - you can't think of anything and twist anything to justify your latest, quite exceptional theory, designed precisely for these suckers, which is called
Well, what to do - the words are simple, but their meaning is probably not clear to everyone.
Whoever wants will try to understand the sense, the rest does not need it.