Disliked{quote} FINALLY, I see someone on FF besides me that understands that R:R is a highly overrated trade management technique!Ignored
The impossible is possible
Your and My Lessons Learned Losing and Gaining in Trading 5 replies
things you learned from forex and improved your life 12 replies
The most important lesson’s I’ve learned trading Forex, so far... 15 replies
Disliked{quote} Very good summary and conclusion. I agree, except for: {quote} I use some indicators that help me to get a picture of the situation. Indicators that work on different time frames and that I understand! I do not follow any "arrow up=buy" or "sell alert!". But it took me a loooooong time to find the indicators that suits my trading style. Same with expert advisors: I do not let my advisors run totally without control (anymore). Not anymore, because of some situation that suddenly appeared and blew my account. Not only once... I then started...Ignored
Disliked{quote} there are successful traders/investors using Kelly. what would you say is better way to manage risk? arbitrary %?Ignored
DislikedYou are doing well but please keep in mind the levels are not support and resistance. Trying to use them as such might work for a while but eventually, you will get burned badly. The levels are just a frame to give you the context of "possibilities" vs "probabilities".Ignored
Disliked{quote} Very true. I absolutely don't rely on support and resistance only. And I use very close stop loss. Plus it's important to understand the whole market. For example USD has been dropping...good profit if you bought xauusd yesterday. Canadian dollar has been doing well also for a while now. Plus I use other technical analysis which is really what my strategy is built around. The rest is just understanding the market to better my chances. Trying to learn Gann theory. He was a genius. I think that would even further improve anyone's chances....Ignored
Disliked{quote} Be sure that you understand how to construct the square of 9 and how to apply values to a chart! Also, check on the instrument that you trade the number of pips in 45 degrees of movement, then divide by 4 and get the typical swing length before a correction is seen. Also, do not get confused by "squaring price and time" as meaning to mathematically calculate the square. Many people try to do that. It has nothing to do with such a calculation.Ignored
Disliked$300K Loss I couldn't do it, I'd probably never trade again. Then again you must have deep pockets to lose that much. I'm pleased you are turning it around. Point 2, Agreed Demo trading successfully for 5 months is a real test, I wish I only demo traded until I was successful. In day trading X5 your account isn't anything special, so many people x2-x4 their demo and start Live trading, but newbies don't know that's not enough. Once you have X50-X100 on Demo you may have the skills to do it live. Also any new setups or ideas need to be executed on...Ignored
DislikedThis is what I got. Also did some smaller sample sizes (over a couple random months) and some went pretty low - in the 65% area. As far as I can tell, the statistics don't show 85%, over multiple years seems like 77% would be the more accurate figure, or am I missing something? Cheers {image}Ignored
Disliked{quote} Well, when you take a small sample size, the smaller you go, the larger the expected deviations can be.Ignored
DislikedI think CeeSo did mention the levy flights, where your distribution of data can have small bouts of large movement here and there. However over a large enough span, they all normalize.Ignored
DislikedHence, your EURUSD data for 0.5 to -0.5 shows 77% probability over 2016-2020. It might not be 85%, but debating whether it's 80% or 85% or 77% seems to be missing the reason Ceeso brings up the percentages, in my opinion.Ignored
DislikedThis is what I got. Also did some smaller sample sizes (over a couple random months) and some went pretty low - in the 65% area. As far as I can tell, the statistics don't show 85%, over multiple years seems like 77% would be the more accurate figure, or am I missing something? Cheers {image}Ignored
double top = o0 + percentage * o0 / 100.0;
double bot = o0 - percentage * o0 / 100.0;
if ((c0 <= top && high0 > top) || (c0 >= bot && low0 < bot))
{
proba++;
trades++;
}
else
trades++;
Print("proba closes between top and bot = ",proba*100/double(trades)); Disliked{quote} I think your numbers are correct, but you're only veryfying is the price closes within +0.5 -0.5% now if you check if the price went above +0.5 then closed under +0.5, then the stats are not the same. I got around 30% hitrate then. Meaning you would be better off trading a breakout than a reversal. I think this whole thread is based on bogus statistics here is my code: double top = o0 + percentage * o0 / 100.0; double bot = o0 - percentage * o0 / 100.0; if ((c0 <= top && high0 > top) || (c0 >= bot && low0 < bot)) { proba++; trades++;...Ignored
Disliked{quote} I think your numbers are correct, but you're only veryfying is the price closes within +0.5 -0.5% now if you check if the price went above +0.5 then closed under +0.5, then the stats are not the same. I got around 30% hitrate then. Meaning you would be better off trading a breakout than a reversal. I think this whole thread is based on bogus statistics here is my code: double top = o0 + percentage * o0 / 100.0; double bot = o0 - percentage * o0 / 100.0; if ((c0 <= top && high0 > top) || (c0 >= bot && low0 < bot)) { proba++; trades++; } else...Ignored
Disliked{quote} I think your numbers are correct, but you're only veryfying is the price closes within +0.5 -0.5% now if you check if the price went above +0.5 then closed under +0.5, then the stats are not the same. I got around 30% hitrate then. Meaning you would be better off trading a breakout than a reversal. I think this whole thread is based on bogus statistics here is my code: double top = o0 + percentage * o0 / 100.0; double bot = o0 - percentage * o0 / 100.0; if ((c0 <= top && high0 > top) || (c0 >= bot && low0 < bot)) { proba++; trades++; } else...Ignored
Disliked{quote} You think wrong. The statistics are not bogus. However, how they are being (mis)used in most of the postings and by many people that clearly know very little about the subject, which can certainly make it appear that the statistics are a problem when in reality, it is the presenter that is the problem.Ignored
Disliked{quote} Thank you for your post. Yes, I was not asking how one would trade this, I merely wanted to confirm that my stats are correct. CeeSo, any particular reason you say 85% when the stats from many different samples sizes indicate that it's closer to the 75% area over longer term stats to close within +.5 to -.5? From what I can see, you posted two spreadsheets showing 81% and 66%, but continually speak about 85%. Not trying to create a debate, just curious why you don't say 'somewhere between 65 - 85%', or 'in the 70's on average', or something...Ignored