I did my version of Zigzag. It was minimum value of pips to start a ZigZag(for example zigzag with minimum leg of 10 pips) and then I looked how much it extends until new zigzag leg develops. And I wrote all zigzag legs and then done statistics with ...

I have downloaded ducascopy tick data for the past 10-15 years data. And all my testing I do in my software with real ticks data. A lot of time I tested zigzag strategies, trying to guess when it ends, or how long does it continue. And it was with ...

I searched too, read all CP posts not once, but didn't find anything reliable longterm. I think my 2D thinking is a problem and want a backtestable reliable strategy. On a positive side, with my knowledge, there is no way, i will trade real acc with ...

In this way you are delaying your loss. And when your loss comes it will be margin call. It doesn't matter if your sl will be 100 or 500 or 1000 pips. At the end you'll lose, if you don't have any edge. If you don't believe me, start coding, you'll ...

Actually it is very good result. The best result I got was 100% with 30% DD in 10 years from backtesting. But for me this result is not worth to trade. If you get better results now, wait a year or two and one day you get margin call. This is the ...

If you have a loosing system, money management doesn't create winning system from it. And if you have a winning system and take overleveraged trades, that system can easily fail. So winning system with bad MM can fail. Most of my created and testing ...

Money management won't help you, if you enter a trade with probability of 50%. And to get probability more than 50% with R:R of 1:1 you need to make astronomic effort. After a lot of testing, I don't believe it is possible any more.

What that way of thinking should be? All my analysis and tests show that trading is complicated. Of course mind can complicate even more already complicated market.

The secret is to become a broker.

I can say winRate of 60% with R:R = 1:1 is way too small to trade. I had found system which gives about 58% winRate after costs, and an average 1p per trade. And after 14 years backtesting the results were AllReturn/MaxDrawdown = 10:1. So with the ...

I started coding from Crucial point thread and his theories. A lot of ideas for testing came from his threads. Some of his theories are true: like for every action, there is a reaction, what comes up, must come down, etc. Also he said all you need ...

Trend (higher highs/lower lows) is a myth for me. For the last half of year I tried to get that edge everyone talks about from the trend. I coded zigzag movements from tick data. I tried everything I can think, starting of break of trend and trading ...

Try code and backtest it, it will be quicker. I always backtest on a minimum 14 years of tick data. I've seen a strong edge with little drawdown for the first 7 years and for second 7 years it lost half of profits and losing till now. So 100 trades ...

I've done it. 1000 to 4000 in about 1.5 months. My TP was 2p, and it was about 1.5% of account. It was very stressful and after that I said I would never do the same. I knew that I have no edge in this and I was rely on luck and my "technical ...

I wrote that I tested only cutting lossers short idea, and wrote how I did it. If you've done enough backtests, you should know, that everywhere it is 50:50 win%, no matter if it is moving average or candle open/close. Moving Average doesn't give ...

Did you backtest this system? It's strange that you get positive pips, when Sysiphus are in drawdown now. I tested cutting lossers short idea, but can't find any edge in it: url

Make an EA of this and backtest this strategy with minimum of 10 years. I have done something similar but with zigzags in zigzags(or 2D zigzags). Price is a b*tch, it only shows how to lose spread on every trade in a long run.

99% traders will never become profitable. If you don't believe it, learn to code and get some analysis. Then you'll see why. There are a lot of myths here: most traders share here what they think, not what it really is.

It's range bars(or renkoRange) openned on offline chart. The candle has only one wick. The body of candle always the same, and the wick is always smaller than a body.

Trying one more time