{quote} Wow 42% drawdown. Don't totally understand how to read that chart, but i'm guessing it was most likely equity DD? (Edit - Oh yeah it was, just noticed the distinction) Nice gains!!..... i guess Independent trader wins THIS CONTEST, as he has proven that not only does tiny leverage hinder long term growth, too tight of a DD limit could as well. All Hail OutThere!!
And hitting the ground running to get a head start on pipmaster, I went blazing. So, that combined with a volatile week and an NFP by the end of the week, things went haywire.
One thing that no one even would know is that amid all that stuff going on, I completely revamped the trading in the account. I mean I completely deployed a new strategy which overlapped with positions I was holding at the time and then I regained full...or at least a better control.
So, to make things better, I had to take a dip to adjust to new and ongoing changes. In fact, a 42% DD sometimes becomes the remedy to a possible 100% DD situation. I think it was a heroic act to sacrifice getting a 42% DD on my record, in order to turn the ship around. That 42% was all in the float anyway. Can't even have open trades that dip the equity by 42%?????
Now. my rant is that the said DD is going to be there as the extent I have or am willing to go anytime. Certainly did it within 2 weeks, Right? so why not again?
Imagine you are driving down the country road and all of a sudden a large tree dislodges itself onto your path and you swerve into the other side and just 42% into going into oncoming traffic (line being at 50%), you pull back in around the fallen tree and back onto straight path to the next town. Now, imagine the same car is equipped with a computer that reads and records every turn and swerve and bump that you take on the road and puts it onto your open face report card for all to see and judge.
So, for a heroic save of the account using phenomenal skills and implementation of exemplary trading dexterity
, you get a mark that is negatively viewed in terms of steepness. It'd be like Capitan Sully getting a blemish of recklessness on his records for saving so many lives.Another thing that you don't see is that 1,346 trades have gone into this. Talk about overtrading. But I like it. If someone likes it, it's not overtrading.
Point is that if that DD of 42% happened over one trade or a few adjacent ones, then that is the standard that the account gets judged by. If one was to divide the number of those few trades by the total sum of the trades, the % would be really small. It might be something like a 1 in a 1000 occurrence or maybe never again since yours truly is in charge.
Hope that addresses your question.
