Breaking through the morning flat - which pairs? - page 17
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
If you don't mind, I can correct it and post it here.
I don't know how Sergey looks at it, but I'll be in favour, Vitaly!
>> Great!
Yes. Igor has a lot of useful stuff. >> Classic. ))
And also for info. I ran EURUSD M15 for five years without Nmax and RiscCoeff, i.e. with constant lot 0.1. And this is what I got
Looks like we are moving in the right direction, comrades...
The topic of "Channel Breakdown" should be further developed. And not just the morning one. imho.
But it's also clear from the schedule that there's still a lot of work to be done. There's enough for everybody. ))
Да. У Игоря полезного очень много. Классик. ))
И еще для инфо. Прогнал пять лет EURUSD М15 без Nmax и RiscCoeff, т.е. постоянным лотом 0,1. И вот что получилось
Похоже, что правильной дорогой двигаемся, товарисчи...
Тему "Пробоя канала" надо и дальше разрабатывать. И не только утреннего. имхо.
Но так же по графику видно, что работы здесь ещё о-го-го. Всем хватит. ))
This is so that the curve is less "wobbly" I have introduced a constant risk per trade. Martin does not apply to this. The morning channel can be of very different widths, so since the stop is known in advance it is easy to adjust the lot size so that the risk per trade is constant. It's a matter of preference, basically. RiskCoeff is inversely proportional to the size of the morning flat. By multiplying the lot by it, we adjust the curve and make it smoother.
This is so that the curve is less "wobbly" I have introduced a constant risk per trade. Martin does not apply to this. The morning channel can be of very different widths, so since the stop is known in advance it is easy to adjust the lot size so that the risk per trade is constant. It's a matter of preference, basically. RiskCoeff is inversely proportional to the size of the morning flat. By multiplying the lot by it, we adjust the curve and make it smoother.
Sergey, thanks for the comment. With RiskCoeff involved the lot does "shake" from 0.1 to 0.32 or so.
It's just that the constant lot test has its own certain "visibility".
What to do with it next is really a matter of preference....
I haven't been able to fix it myself, who can post the corrected one?
I couldn't get it right myself, who can post the corrected one?
>> Let's wait for the boy. Maybe Sergei is working on the matter?
Алексей, предложение с моей стороны прозвучало. Аутор промолчал.
Подождем мальца. Может, Сергей, работает над этим вопросом?
I'll redo it tonight.
I'll remove the martin and adjust the balance.
Забанен
Thank you, the ban was helpful. I will try not to repeat my own mistakes.
Repeat, but gently.
I'll redo it tonight.
I'll remove the martin, adjust the balance.
By the way, while we're waiting.
i met an advisor-martin - the original name of the advisor has been erased - he was named Maks
I think they used Ilan as the base and changed it to a non-martin setting - the point is that he did not increase lot size,
I did not use a lot - I tried to open lots in the same direction - I got profit by the sum of the lots.
I did not use pivots - I traded this EA for more than a week at maximal risk.
- But the profit was not big and the code was decompiled and not very valuable
I mean that martin is not the same as martin.
I mean, there's a big difference between martin and martin.
For all the seemingly limitless power of Martin, you can only use it if you understand its entire mechanism down to the last comma.
How many people have died......
.................................
By the way, I gave an example with pictures here, how spread (zero) is underestimated and Martin is overestimated in the absence of positive expected payoff.