as to the differant results in the post you mention I was changeing the TPs perimiters to see the differance in results....
- #342
- Aug 11, 2007 6:01pm Aug 11, 2007 6:01pm
- | Membership Revoked | Joined Dec 2005 | 2,298 Posts
Same Whore .... Different Dress
- #343
- Aug 11, 2007 6:04pm Aug 11, 2007 6:04pm
- | Membership Revoked | Joined Dec 2005 | 2,298 Posts
Yes but why should the tool take more or less TRADES based on what TP you set? It's severly flawed at the moment. We must wait til IndyCash fix it. And then, I'm all for posting the results just as you've done recently
fair enough......but even flawed it does give you an idea that TheThing was and is on the right track with this strategy and what the potential can be........catch ya later.
Same Whore .... Different Dress
- #346
- Edited 10:02pm Aug 11, 2007 9:28pm | Edited 10:02pm
Am I the only one finding this quite irrelevant? I mean the tools is super cool but at the moment it got some flaws that needs to worked out..
Nope, you are not the only one
Right now I have fixed all issues and added all requested features in this thread... apart from the most important one.... which is the need to wait for 24 hours after 3 matching bars to enter the order.
It's Sunday afternoon down here and I try to avoid the PC as much as possible on weekends... but I'll post when it is 100% right.
I am looking forward to adding ATR calcs to it to set the TP and SL levels and see how that works.
I guess it's pretty obvious from playing with it already that the SMA5 calls are not much use.. think I had better add EMA20/50 numbers instead of the simple MA numbers it is using now too.
Oh yeah... all pairs have 12 months worth of data available now too
- #347
- Aug 11, 2007 11:08pm Aug 11, 2007 11:08pm
- | Membership Revoked | Joined Dec 2005 | 2,298 Posts
Indycash...
your posting this tool was not premature at all it has allowed us to run it and test it with differant inputs and though it is not 100% it is still able to give us some rough idea as to the potential of thething's strategy......
the post with the table of differant time entries is valuable in that it shows there is deffinatly an optimum time of day for entries..... my posts were intended to stimulate experimentation instead of antagination....
also the current data only seems to go only as far as july 07 so this is not a tool to use as a trade entry indicator.....
anyway have a good weekend all....
your posting this tool was not premature at all it has allowed us to run it and test it with differant inputs and though it is not 100% it is still able to give us some rough idea as to the potential of thething's strategy......
the post with the table of differant time entries is valuable in that it shows there is deffinatly an optimum time of day for entries..... my posts were intended to stimulate experimentation instead of antagination....
also the current data only seems to go only as far as july 07 so this is not a tool to use as a trade entry indicator.....
anyway have a good weekend all....
Same Whore .... Different Dress
- #348
- Aug 11, 2007 11:19pm Aug 11, 2007 11:19pm
- Joined Nov 2005 | Status: EURUSD Quant FREAK | 3,197 Posts
- #351
- Aug 12, 2007 3:54am Aug 12, 2007 3:54am
I agree too... sorry I posted it before I had it 100% correct.
Right now I have fixed all issues and added all requested features in this thread... apart from the most important one.... which is the need to wait for 24 hours after 3 matching bars to enter the order.
It's Sunday afternoon down here and I try to avoid the PC as much as possible on weekends... but I'll post when it is 100% right.
I am looking forward to adding ATR calcs to it to set the TP and SL levels and see how that works.
I guess it's pretty obvious from playing with it already that the SMA5 calls are not much use.. think I had better add EMA20/50 numbers instead of the simple MA numbers it is using now too.
Oh yeah... all pairs have 12 months worth of data available now too
However as you said seems all bugs have been fixed except the one..and the most important..THERE IS NO NEED TO WAIT 24 HOURS AFTER 3 CANDLES CLOSED..YOU ENTER AT 4 CANDLE OPENING (NOT 5th CANDLE!).
Look at the chart and one can see how we can easily turn winner into a losser!
09/13/06 Buy Signal
09/14/06 Entry at: 1.8872 - TP1 at: 1.8922 - TP2 at: 1.8957 - SL at: 1.8782
MA20: 1.8883 - MA50: 1.8753 - Trend: Bullish - TRADE CONFIRMED
09/18/06 SL triggered at 1.8782 -180 pips 00:00:00gmt
09/20/06 Buy Signal
09/21/06 Entry at: 1.9034 - TP1 at: 1.9084 - TP2 at: 1.9119 - SL at: 1.8944
MA20: 1.8872 - MA50: 1.8794 - Trend: Bullish - TRADE CONFIRMED
09/26/06 SL triggered at 1.8944 -180 pips 10:45:00gmt
If you have some free time please fix it
Kind regards,
TheThing
I agree too... sorry I posted it before I had it 100% correct.
Right now I have fixed all issues and added all requested features in this thread... apart from the most important one.... which is the need to wait for 24 hours after 3 matching bars to enter the order.
It's Sunday afternoon down here and I try to avoid the PC as much as possible on weekends... but I'll post when it is 100% right.
I am looking forward to adding ATR calcs to it to set the TP and SL levels and see how that works.
I guess it's pretty obvious from playing with it already that the SMA5 calls are not much use.. think I had better add EMA20/50 numbers instead of the simple MA numbers it is using now too.
Oh yeah... all pairs have 12 months worth of data available now too
We're just glad you're doing this in whatever pace you see fit. ATR would be really cool, and please don't remove SMA, add EMA also so we can see which perform best (unless it's to big trouble, calculating EMA's is a little bit more complex).
And super thanks to you!
Indycash...
your posting this tool was not premature at all it has allowed us to run it and test it with differant inputs and though it is not 100% it is still able to give us some rough idea as to the potential of thething's strategy......
the post with the table of differant time entries is valuable in that it shows there is deffinatly an optimum time of day for entries..... my posts were intended to stimulate experimentation instead of antagination....
anyway have a good weekend all....
And about the time. I'm not sure how you can say that the findings you made brings us any closer to an optimal timed entry. On another forum an MA cross with stochastics performs best at GMT +5, does that mean that this system will perform best at GMT +5? No. Why? Because that system is NOT THIS SYSTEM. Just as the tool doesnt represent THIS SYSTEM. So the information you presented are worthless. There is no wrong in exprimentation, but I think you've pushed it a bit over the edge. Post results from random entrys and 24 hour delays is a bit over exprimentation..
I have to agree with Zunk, this thread has been hi-jacked by technicians and trading theorists and unfortunately will end up like most i.e soon forgotten about. It's a pity because I think this method's got potential but the desire to add MA's, indicators and EA's confines to the fate of most systems posted on FF!
Can't hurt, at least until proven otherwise, to test the additional "stuff." However, at 80-90%, SIMPLE is doing very well! So, we need to be be very careful about mucking it up with way too much stuff!!
As for me, I'm gonna stick with the SIMPLE plus EMA20-EMA50 system. As time, and trades progress, I will do my best to revise the SL and TP for each pair down to a reasonabe level plus a few pips for hedge. May never get the scientifically correct answer . . . but who cares!!!!!!!
Again, I'm not asking anyone else to follow my lead . . . however I had hoped that folks would help each other with advice, cooperation, etc. After all, we are ALL gonna "see" pretty much the same 3-day setups! And we have a GOLDEN opportunity, on the 4th day trades, to build wealth over time . . . who cares if we miss the BIG trade. We can grow grow wealthy over a period of several months, to a year, with small leverage and conservative TP targets.
Gents, helping each other when 3-day setups BEGIN to present themselves and then communicating about a possible 4th day trade is the key!!! We can ALL then take a look and discuss it . . . we have time! Again, let's try to hang together . . . the issue is not indicators . . . it's basic setups and trading them correctly.
Regards, K
- #354
- Edited 7:09am Aug 12, 2007 7:09am | Edited 7:09am
IndyCash not trying to stress you here or anything, take your time! Don't look at this until monday! =)
Results for pair: EURJPY
Period: Aug 2006 - Jul 2007
Daily Start Time: 15:00:00 gmt
TP1: 40 TP2: 90 SL: 90
Total Confirmed Signals: 15
Winners: 10
Losers: 5
Pips: -140
------------------------------
Results for pair: EURJPY
Period: Aug 2006 - Jul 2007
Daily Start Time: 15:00:00 gmt
TP1: 40 TP2: 100 SL: 90
Total Confirmed Signals: 14
Winners: 10
Losers: 4
Pips: 80
Different amount of trades depending on TP2. It's strange. It may be that a bigger TP2 does have a open trade while a new signal is coming and therefor the trade is not taken.. I will look into it. I'll be back later with my findings
You have answered to all people except my post just above
I just wanted to let you know that tool enters the trade after 24 hours after 3rd candle is closed and it against the rules as you can see from the chart posted above. So your results are just from another system not SIMPLE
TheThing
Dear Zunk,
You have answered to all people except my post just above
I just wanted to let you know that tool enters the trade after 24 hours after 3rd candle is closed and it against the rules as you can see from the chart posted above. So your results are just from another system not SIMPLE
TheThing
Have a nice sunday everybody!!
- #356
- Aug 12, 2007 7:44am Aug 12, 2007 7:44am
Please note that the information you provided are irrelevant unless your rules are
Wait for 3same color bars and MA trend THEN wait 24hours then enter trade as the 24 hours hadn't been there.
: To avoid cunfusion - enter the trade when 3 matching candles are closed with the opening of 4th candle.
And as for different number of trades..the solution possibly is here..Let's imagine some bars..
A strong bullish trend..we have about only 10 bullish bars with different Open-Close values. We count 1-2-3 and enter on 4th bars..If you set a small TP1 and TP2 and 4th bar is enough to satisfy your TPs levels then the trade is closed and you get your profit. But 5th bar is again bullish and 3 matching candles before so we open another long trade. But it's against the rules. We have to wait for another 3 bars formation starting from the day we closed our previous position.
And now imagine that 4th bar is very little and you have set a big TP levels so the trade wouldn't be closed on 4th bar. And 5th bar again is too small and your TP is not hit and only 6th bar closes your trade with your TP levels. And this makes the difference in number of trades.
Kind regards,
TheThing
This seems a little tricky
To avoid cunfusion - enter the trade when 3 matching candles are closed with the opening of 4th candle.
And as for different number of trades..the solution possibly is here..Let's imagine some bars..
A strong bullish trend..we have about only 10 bullish bars with different Open-Close values. We count 1-2-3 and enter on 4th bars..If you set a small TP1 and TP2 and 4th bar is enough to satisfy your TPs levels then the trade is closed and you get your profit. But 5th bar is again bullish and 3 matching candles before so we open another long trade. But it's against the rules. We have to wait for another 3 bars formation starting from the day we closed our previous position.
And now imagine that 4th bar is very little and you have set a big TP levels so the trade wouldn't be closed on 4th bar. And 5th bar again is too small and your TP is not hit and only 6th bar closes your trade with your TP levels. And this makes the difference in number of trades.
Kind regards,
TheThing
And what you wrote is excatly what I wrote in my 2nd last post
- #358
- Aug 12, 2007 8:02am Aug 12, 2007 8:02am
It was meant as a response to johnedoe's result posting. He's posts are based on the rules i wrote there. since they're incorrect the results he'd posted shouldn't be taken seriously.
And what you wrote is excatly what I wrote in my 2nd last post
I'm just trying to make it more clear for myself writing it down 
