Higher Edge within a Single Candlestick | Page 89 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

An Edge for an Edge (System Development) 116 replies

Beating the Odds - Edge Within a Single Candlestick (Explained) 71 replies

Looking for higher timeframe candlestick overlay indicator 10 replies

top 2 single candlestick pattern 7 replies

There is No Edge in a Single Candlestick 64 replies

Attachments: Higher Edge within a Single Candlestick
Exit Attachments

Higher Edge within a Single Candlestick

  • #1,761
  • Oct 25, 2017 3:08am Oct 25, 2017 3:08am
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: 01.png Size: 57 KB
  • #1,762
  • Oct 26, 2017 10:06am Oct 26, 2017 10:06am
Quoting CrucialPoint
So I searched, "where in nature do I find randomness being captured?" >>> the cheetah. I mentioned that nature designed the cheetah to be an efficient and effective hunting machine.
Attached Image
Bottomless wonders spring from simple rules, which are repeated without end
  • #1,763
  • Oct 26, 2017 11:22am Oct 26, 2017 11:22am
Quoting limprobable
{quote} {image}
Because he knows his anatomy and cannot chase for more than 20 seconds. A cheetah will fail if he thinks like a lion. A trader will fail if he simply copies a strategy that is not in compliance with his own anatomy. How many trained snippers are out there in the army compared to soldiers carrying automatic machine guns. Pretty simple and common sense logic.
Staying in my lane...
  • #1,764
  • Oct 27, 2017 3:01am Oct 27, 2017 3:01am
Quoting VEEFX
Pretty simple and common sense logic.
My common sense of logic says thats a retail trader is not the cheetah, but the sick baby antelope.

"your" big ego see "yourself" like a cheetah.

But Maybe we must become a quick little mouse to escape the cheetah.

Well, too much paradox here to have a good epitome. Be a cheetah is not realistic (too much egocentrisme), be a antelope too (not enough egocentrsime).

We are just humans and have to deal with it
Bottomless wonders spring from simple rules, which are repeated without end
  • #1,765
  • Oct 28, 2017 7:05am Oct 28, 2017 7:05am
Quoting josh11
{quote} Really!! Lol ok, how do you think you develop an edge?!
Everyone wants it easy -sigh-.

I don't think he understands that if you learn what NOT to do and there are only two options...
"The fun is in the hunt. Not the kill."
  • #1,766
  • Oct 28, 2017 7:22am Oct 28, 2017 7:22am
Quoting Warburg
VEE, I do appreciate your kind words. It appears we're reading from the same page. I mention the word 'variables' a lot, but the longer I'm in this game, the more I believe that this word needs to dominate our thinking. Again, with all of these 'variables' constantly being factored in, our concentration needs to be - simply put, making more on our wins than we're loosing on our loses. One of the biggest mistakes we make is 'trying to figure it out'. I'm not sure it can be done, at least in the traditional sense - and it's not necessary in order...
I think some people have difficulty realizing that having no position is still a position(such as USD/USD). It's certainly the best position because it has zero correlation with any other pair. It's also the worst position because it never turns a profit. I'm just glad it's easy to tell when to close it.
"The fun is in the hunt. Not the kill."
  • #1,767
  • Oct 28, 2017 12:38pm Oct 28, 2017 12:38pm
Quoting limprobable
{quote} {image}
Weinstein: what a load of bull.........so a professional trader has no chance of losing???
  • #1,768
  • Oct 28, 2017 12:41pm Oct 28, 2017 12:41pm
Quoting yonnie
{quote} Weinstein: what a load of bull.........so a professional trader has no chance of losing???
What is this 'losing' thing you speak of? A professional trader doesn't understand. There is no losing.
"The fun is in the hunt. Not the kill."
  • #1,769
  • Oct 28, 2017 12:54pm Oct 28, 2017 12:54pm
Quoting Redeflect
{quote} What is this 'losing' thing you speak of? A professional trader doesn't understand. There is no losing.
maybe they`re losing their mind then, lol
  • #1,770
  • Oct 28, 2017 4:39pm Oct 28, 2017 4:39pm
Quoting yonnie
{quote} maybe they`re losing their mind then, lol
How often do you lose a trade?
"The fun is in the hunt. Not the kill."
  • #1,771
  • Oct 28, 2017 7:07pm Oct 28, 2017 7:07pm
Quoting Redeflect
{quote} How often do you lose a trade?
too often to call myself a professional trader according to Weinstein
  • #1,772
  • Nov 3, 2017 11:43am Nov 3, 2017 11:43am
Emotions.... Instincts.... How the market tricks us...... And why(because there's money involved and everyone is in a battle to take what's theirs)
And just to make things difficult:

Our brains don't actually see. Our eyes sense light, color, and all of our surroundings - and our brain interprets it into vision.

Our brain also fills in missing pieces of vision. We all have a blind spot where our nerves all connect inside of our eyeballs, and that small blind spot gets filled in by our brain. All of our vision is created in the brain and if we think we see something.... we believe it, or we believe we saw it.

Our brains have been trained over thousands of generations to detect movement and things that are out of place, things that are out of the ordinary.
Example: If all of the trees are swaying, we ignore it because it is caused by the wind. But if one tree sways and wiggles differently, our brain detects that. It senses danger. Our brains are trained to catch shadows, and to detect small differences in movements within a constantly moving environment. --Warning / Danger--

When our brain "catches a shadow", or when our brain believes that our eyeball caught a shadow or a difference in the regular movements that were already occurring all around us, we get an adrenaline rush. Our vitals are instantly elevated, we get fear and concern, fight or flight mechanism..... all from "catching a shadow". It's quite natural really.

The market does this to us all of the time. While the charts are bouncing around, lightly up and down, not causing any particular fear or concern..... all it takes is one fast candle to form, or a double sized candle, and the blood pressure jumps and the endorphins pop.

Every time the market "jumps", we jump. And there is little we can do to stop it because it's kinda like blinking, it's an instinct.

So plan your trades in advance. Plan on what you are going to do if and when the market "jumps".

Recognize that this is what the market does. And if you trade with a crim br0ker, then their price feed to the platform probably has extra little jumps and wiggles put in there to trigger these instincts (We call them "emotions").
  • #1,773
  • Nov 6, 2017 3:29am Nov 6, 2017 3:29am
Quoting alphaomega
{quote} You cannot win on roulette. It's mathematically impossible regardless of the betting strategy and money management. The best you can do is to delay the total loss by "smart" and conservative betting. But if you play long enough eventually you will lose the whole capital. The only real way to win is by cheating in one way or another. a) Find some way to manipulate the roulette by physical or electronic means. b) Use highly sophisticated electronic devices and special software which can predict the next number based on the trajectory and the...
A little off topic and quoting a post from a couple of months back, but I disagree with this completely. Simply because I constantly win on roulette. Not always, but I win at least 4 out of 5 times, and its probably more like 9 out of 10. So why don't I do it full time? Or do it for a living, even part time? Well, I was working towards that some years back. I love the casino, but you try spending even 1 day a week for 3-4 hours each time for a few months seated at a table...and you will soon get sick of it. Especially when after 3 hours you are at break even or having a losing day. Try going several days in a row...It's quite soul destroying.

I now go maybe half a dozen time a year at most. The last time I lost was probably about a year ago. And sometimes I get really really lucky and have made my profit target in 10-15mins. Thats the hard part....I'm there to make money, but also to have fun. It takes me about an 45mins plus to drive to the casino, and now after just 10 mins playing, I reach my profit target....bugger.... But I get up and walk away.

I win at roulette now because I go to enjoy it and I don't do it on a regular basis. And I can't win on a table with 0 and 00.

I wrote this here in FF back in 2011:

At the start of the last decade, with internet now a household phenomenon, I found the online casinos. I started out losing, time after time, but learned much (not to use martingale style betting was inevitably one of the first ), and went on to create some winning systems, building up small accounts in many casinos only to see them start losing as I increased my bet size. I would take out my winnings, and move to the next casino, where the same thing happened. So I tried live casinos, but I soon saw it wasn’t anywhere as glamorous as the movies. And even though I often came out winning, when you spend several consecutive days for hours on end only to break even (or even lose some days), rest assured you are cured of thinking gambling is an exciting way to make a living. Even winning, the depressive nature of the casino itself got to me.
Return on Equity: 2017, 32.4%; 2018; 8.0%, 2019 (30Apr), 4.5%
  • #1,774
  • Edited Nov 7, 2017 11:51am Nov 6, 2017 6:29pm | Edited Nov 7, 2017 11:51am
Quoting Xeniz
I disagree with this completely. Simply because I constantly win on roulette. Not always, but I win at least 4 out of 5 times, and its probably more like 9 out of 10.
Actually, alphaomega -- and the mathematical academia -- are right on the money. As Churchill once said, "You can't take sides against arithmetic".

Plenty of folk win 9 times out of 10, with or without any 'system', by simply quitting while they're ahead. In reality, it's the result of a statistical distribution, or more colloquially 'luck'. And after all, the house edge is only 1/37 (or 2/38 if both 0 and 00).

Anybody who wins 90 out of 100 sessions has their play -- and more likely, their person -- scrutinized intently by the casino's investigative personnel. (And if the casino suspects anything is amiss, they take the precaution of replacing the croupier, the balls used, and possibly even the wheel..... and any other measures necessary to protect their profits).

Nobody wins 900 out of 1,000 visits. They would have been banned -- or escorted to the back room (LOL, anybody remember this movie?) -- long before then.

From wikipedia: The LLN (law of large numbers) is important because it "guarantees" stable long-term results for the averages of some random events. For example, while a casino may lose money in a single spin of the roulette wheel, its earnings will tend towards a predictable percentage over a large number of spins. Any winning streak by a player will eventually be overcome by the parameters of the game. It is important to remember that the LLN only applies (as the name indicates) when a large number of observations is considered.

Casinos know their games MUCH better than the average punter does (more here). Nobody can rightfully say "I beat the casino" until they've been officially blacklisted.

Footnote: There's a lot of commonsense truth in the information presented here. (I wouldn't necessarily buy one of his computers or systems though. As soon as the casino surveillance detects the computer on your person, guess what happens next............)
  • #1,775
  • Nov 6, 2017 9:44pm Nov 6, 2017 9:44pm
Hanover,

What part of NZ are you in? Im in Auckland, happy for you to come and sit beside me the next three times I go to the casino. I do not profess to have a mathematical edge. I walk away when I'm ahead. I do not profess to be able to "beat" the casino. I simply try to play so that more "luck" falls my way. Sometimes, not often, I get hit hard. And with the levels I play the casino is not going to be interested in any "system" they think I may use.... I am a very small fish indeed... And of course, if they were, they would think I will be back to lose it another day.

Playing 3-4 times a year I don't think I will ever reach 1000 visits in my lifetime....and winning maybe $500 on average is hardly something they would even care about.
Return on Equity: 2017, 32.4%; 2018; 8.0%, 2019 (30Apr), 4.5%
  • #1,776
  • Nov 7, 2017 5:53am Nov 7, 2017 5:53am
Quoting Xeniz
Hanover, What part of NZ are you in? Im in Auckland, happy for you to come and sit beside me the next three times I go to the casino.
Thanks, that's very generous. I live in Hamilton, but like I said, 3 visits wouldn't convince me, I'd want to see your net profit/loss after 300 visits.

You say that you don't profess to be able to "beat the casino". Fair enough, but the harsh reality is that either (1) your system is capable of beating the casino over the long term; or (2) it isn't, and you've merely been lucky thus far. If you visit the casino only 3-4 times per year, then no offence, but you don't really have conclusive proof.

If you were willing to share your system, it could be tested easily enough over millions of trials by writing a software simulation (like this).

David
  • #1,777
  • Nov 7, 2017 4:16pm Nov 7, 2017 4:16pm
Quoting hanover
{quote} Thanks, that's very generous. I live in Hamilton, but like I said, 3 visits wouldn't convince me, I'd want to see your net profit/loss after 300 visits. You say that you don't profess to be able to "beat the casino". Fair enough, but the harsh reality is that either (1) your system is capable of beating the casino over the long term; or (2) it isn't, and you've merely been lucky thus far. If you visit the casino only 3-4 times per year, then no offence, but you don't really have conclusive proof. If you were willing to share your system,...
Hi David,

I think we are a little misaligned in our line of conversation. I agree that there is no mathematical edge to be gained over the casino. I don't believe there is a "system" that can beat the house. However, I was disagreeing with the original comment that even with a betting strategy and money management, you can't win on roulette. I say that because I do win many more times than I lose, and I'm sure there are others too. Perhaps similar to forex, where the house "edge" is the spread. Strategy and money management vary widely as do individual results.


My method is arbitrary, quite simple in theory, and works for me most times. I look at columns, lines, streets, sixes, corners, dozens, split, etc, occasionally combined with a trio or split with 0 as a hedge, and work off probability. Like most people, I know (excluding the "0") that all else being equal, the odds of a street being hit is 1 in 12. So maybe there has been 36 spins without that street being hit...statistically it should have been hit 3 times by now, so surely it will be hit soon....and some people bet on it coming up soon. The only difference is I WAIT for it to be hit. It may not get hit until after 48 spins. Then I start betting on it. How many times do you see the same number come up several times within just a few spins after it hasn't appeared for a while? And I spread this type of betting over the table, so I might have bets on a street, a dozen, trio, and two splits all at the same time.

All up, over a lot of spins, everything more or less tends to balance itself out. Thats why I sometimes have to sit there for a while even not betting until I see chances come up. They don't all get hit either. On ocassion I have taken my loss, and sat round seeing what would have happened had I kept playing, for learning purposes. Sometimes, I would have made all my money back and more. Other times I would have ended up losing even more. And I tend to have much better results when a real person is spinning the wheel than a computed generated one. So a simple strategy combined with money management can work. Will it work after 300 visits? Have I just been getting lucky over the last few years? I'll let you know in about another 75 to 100 years time.

There is one important factor here that I feel you are overlooking. I like playing poker, roulette, blackjack etc. But I don't like losing money (the reason why I don't play card games at the casino). I don't touch the one-arm bandits. If I bet on sports games or the Melbourne Cup, they are very small bets and usually in a social context (office sweepstake etc) If I was not winning at roulette, I would not bet hundreds of dollars on it. I simply would not go back to the casino.
Return on Equity: 2017, 32.4%; 2018; 8.0%, 2019 (30Apr), 4.5%
  • #1,778
  • Nov 7, 2017 6:20pm Nov 7, 2017 6:20pm
Quoting Xeniz
Hi David, I think we are a little misaligned in our line of conversation..........
Many thanks for your reply. I agree that many players are able to win in the short term (or if they play infrequently enough), but also that the house edge will almost certainly beat every player across the long term. I don't believe that there is any kind of playing or betting strategy that can change that.

The notion that 'cold' numbers, colors, etc have a higher probability of occurring in the future to 'even things out' is known as "gambler's fallacy".

I don't want to get into a long debate (as I'll probably only end up repeating myself ), so I will simply refer back to this page, which addresses many roulette fallacies that are commonly believed by unsuspecting punters.

I wish you much continued success,
David
  • #1,779
  • Nov 7, 2017 7:01pm Nov 7, 2017 7:01pm
Quoting hanover
{quote} Many thanks for your reply. I agree that many players are able to win in the short term (or if they play infrequently enough), but also that the house edge will almost certainly beat every player across the long term. I don't believe that there is any kind of playing or betting strategy that can change that. The notion that 'cold' numbers, colors, etc have a higher probability of occurring in the future to 'even things out' is known as "gambler's...
Thanks David,

As you say, no point continuing the debate as we will both end up repeating ourselves. I started playing roulette about 20 years ago, and I admit I was completely sucked in thinking it was possible to earn a living from it. At one point I even purchased some online books and a couple of "money-back guaranteed systems" knowing they were scammers but curious to see what they could offer (there are some elaborate systems out there that work most of the time but the end is inevitable). I know all about gambler's fallacy and wheel bias, croupier bias etc etc.

Some years back, before the casinos existed in NZ, I knew a man who travelled across the ditch to play a couple of times a year. His system was simple (I can't recall it exactly) but basically he waited until there were 6 reds, or six blacks, and then bet heavily, doubling up if required, and always won. Until the one time when the run went up to 10 or 11 reds (at which time he had exhausted all his funds or reached the table limit, or combination of both possibly) and he lost the lot. Again, I can't recall specifics but it was a hell of a lot money back then, something like $100k from memory, and he said it was everything he had won in the last 10 years or so and then some, because he thought he would never lose. He never went back to a casino again.

I was reminded of this guy a couple of years back when I went to the Gold Coast for a conference. I was there 3 nights, and spent the evenings at the casino. I had 3 winning visits, the best at $800, and basically paid for most of my trip as a result. The fact that I too was across the ditch playing roulette didn't escape me though.

Here's to my luck continuing!
Return on Equity: 2017, 32.4%; 2018; 8.0%, 2019 (30Apr), 4.5%
  • #1,780
  • Nov 12, 2017 8:36pm Nov 12, 2017 8:36pm
Quoting hanover
{quote} Plenty of folk win 9 times out of 10, with or without any 'system', by simply quitting while they're ahead. In reality, it's the result of a statistical distribution, or more colloquially 'luck'. And after all, the house edge is only 1/37 (or 2/38 if both 0 and 00) ....
Hi Hanover, I am agree that for long run it is difficult to get the same good result without any good statistical proved data (which ever any idea/system we use). If i understand it correctly, this 9/10 result a bove can be applied to Forex world too, right ?? If yes, which TF will give the best result (i just predict that it is below H4, but which one is the best among H1 to M1 ) ?
Gracias ...
I am failed,but i found 1,000 ways that won't work ...
8 traders viewing now