Registration for the MetaQuotes-Demo Championships in May - page 27
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 knew you wouldn't agree.)))
Well then you could create criteria so that every dollar earned is accounted for by the risk it carries for the deposit. Is that fair? - Fair enough. The contest is interesting for potential investors, they should be the first to be targeted. Is this what investors are interested in? - Yes. But there is no way that you with your attitude to risk will make it to the top.
My reasoning is based on the interests of investors. I myself have always tended to trade as an investor, not as a roulette player, so I think that the contest should be interesting not only for participants, but also for investors. After all, the contest has no prizes and the only motivation to participate is to attract investors and/or clients to the signal. Otherwise the sense of the contest is lost, there is no point in winning just to win, I've already said this, because in that case you could use purely random strategies with huge lots, taking part in 10 such competitions you are almost guaranteed to win, but who is interested? - Not for me that's for sure.
I think that if you are focused on investors, then yes, your criteria are more important to them, but as for me it is a competition, not a show in front of investors, in this vein I see that in formula 1 they calculate who saves how much fuel)
Andriy, if you focus on investors, then yes your criteria are more important to them, but as I see it is a competition, not a show in front of investors, in this vein I see that in formula 1 for example, in the calculation who saved how much fuel).
Read my post above. Just about the pissing contest and the size of the deposit.)))
So there is no interest and sense to just measure deposits.
One thing I ask - when judging the rules, please do not use personalities, insults.
Thank you. .
Yes, everyone seems to be sticking to their own opinion here anyway.
Well, there's another way of doing it. Leave everything as it is, determine the winner by maximum balance (all positions should be closed). In the case of the "Territorial Complex" the "Territorial Complex" was established on the basis of the "Dobrokat" project.
Then the investors will still have an opportunity to adequately orientate. The wolves are safe and the sheep fed.
One thing I ask - when judging rules, please do not use personalities, insults.
Thank you .
I have the following compromise proposal so as not to lose participants.
To be judged in two categories.
1) I like Andrey's proposal, it has beautiful and reasonable rules, it is perfect for a potential investor.
2) Leave the possibility of 20% drawdown and do not slow down with the loading, there are investors willing to tolerate and 30% drawdown.
Well, let them both perform, in the end, we will be happy with both camps.
Make a table sorted by Andrew's formula and the second by equity.
And the result is two winners in different categories!
Potential investors will choose themselves beautiful entries and exits, risks and drawdowns will also be evaluated.
If the rules are changed to determine winners other than the maximum balance, I can be crossed out of the competition in advance.
I have the following compromise proposal, in order not to lose participants.
to be judged in two categories
1) I like Andrew's proposal, as it gives us beautiful and reasonable rules, it is perfect for a potential investor.
2) Leave the possibility of 20% drawdown and do not slow down with the loading, there are investors willing to tolerate and 30% drawdown.
Well, let them both perform, in the end, we will have satisfied both camps.
We should make a table sorted according to Andrey's formula and the second one according to equity.
And the result is two winners in different categories!
Potential investors will choose the most beautiful entries and exits on their own, the risks and drawdowns will be evaluated as well.
I agree - a middle ground is very difficult, but it's possible
Conditions for disqualification:
1. Exceeding the maximum drawdown of 20%.
2. Exceeding the volume of any one transaction by 80% of the total traded volume.
3. minimum number of trades of 10.
I am against any trading restrictions at all