Can you handle 40 losses in a row? | Forex Factory

Options

Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Do you believe tight stop-losses cause losses in the long run? 76 replies

Do you believe fixed stop-losses cause losses in the long run? 16 replies

I have 9 losses in row. Best MM ? 13 replies

Three Losses in a Row 36 replies

Attachments: Can you handle 40 losses in a row?
Exit Attachments

Can you handle 40 losses in a row?

  • #1
  • First Post: Nov 5, 2007 2:53am Nov 5, 2007 2:53am
Seems a bit extreme, but losses can come like there is no tommorow....

You Martingalers would be gone after the first 15 or so?

Not to divert this to a Martingale thread, but Martingale doesn't necessarily mean 1, 2, 4, 8, 16. Nor does it mean 1, 1, 2, 4 etc.

Somehow a variation of 1, 1.5. 2.25 etc will work, and to do this properly you'd need to do what?

hint) d'Alembert's theory (not the stupid binary equation) is powerful.

But not as powerful as these three things: "R:R" "Fixed R" "compounding" oh and of course, we are nothing without "win expectancy"

Yes, 40 losses in a row would have most of us coughing up blood. I am glad that risk management is my grail of trading, and that most of us will never know how to use market weakness to our advantage.
  • #2
  • Nov 5, 2007 4:11pm Nov 5, 2007 4:11pm
i think anyone taking 40 losses in a row would definately need to take a step out of his shoes and really see what's going wrong! whether you're trading systematically or by discretion.

Good luck! Hope we don't ever have that kind of a drawdown!
"The market pays you to be disciplined"
  • #3
  • Nov 5, 2007 4:19pm Nov 5, 2007 4:19pm
Rather than D'Alembert, look closer at Oscar's Grind, if you still want to use a progression. At least Oscar's Grind is not a negative progression. D'Alembert is still a negative progression even though you are adding and removing numbers from the sequence.

I do not agree with using any form of negative progression.
  • #4
  • Nov 5, 2007 4:26pm Nov 5, 2007 4:26pm
I'm not sure if my 3 year old could do 40 losses in a row. But MM is definitely the key to long term success.

I only risk about 1% a trade my self.... So it would be a kick in the nuts but I would still be standing (bent forward)
  • #5
  • Nov 5, 2007 4:33pm Nov 5, 2007 4:33pm
Quoting turbokaos
So it would be a kick in the nuts but I would still be standing (bent forward)



I guess a lot of factors would come into play(mostly the system itself). But are these 40 FULL losses? Or are they losses cut short, and the 41st trade is the let your profits run. I don't think I could ever trade a system with 40 losses in a row, to be brutally honest.
  • #6
  • Nov 5, 2007 4:50pm Nov 5, 2007 4:50pm
40 losses in a row would be as improbable as 40 wins in a row. However with a scaling MM strategy you should survive. If you are trading 2% of the balance when you enter, the lot sizes should get progressively smaller. However at the 40th loss I'd consider reversing your method.
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. ~ Aristotle
  • #7
  • Nov 5, 2007 6:51pm Nov 5, 2007 6:51pm
I think after 20 or 30 losses in a row (never mind 40), I'd give up trading and buy a lottery ticket... after all, the chances are astronomical (assuming 50% W/L rate, 1 in a million for 20 in a row, and 1 in a billion for 30 in a row).
  • #8
  • Nov 5, 2007 6:52pm Nov 5, 2007 6:52pm
Quoting Vensik
40 losses in a row would be as improbable as 40 wins in a row. However with a scaling MM strategy you should survive. If you are trading 2% of the balance when you enter, the lot sizes should get progressively smaller.
Loan me $100.00 & I'll pay you back at a rate of 50% Balance/Day means I will be utilizing some portion of your funds ad infinitum. Same goes for depleting funds @ 2% / Play, EXCEPT, eventually you fail to have the anti. At that point, You Are Out.
Quoting Vensik
However at the 40th loss I'd consider reversing your method.
This is a semantic in yourself that you may want to rethink. Whether it be 5, 10 20 or 40, this is no reason to "Reverse your method."
Rethink your method, perhaps.
  • #9
  • Nov 5, 2007 7:02pm Nov 5, 2007 7:02pm
If you have 40 losses in a row u still can be successfull.

Here is what u have to do: Hire a programmer to create a system or an EA where when u push a buy button on metatrader the EA will change it to SELL and vice versa...

Don't fotrget to post the EA here if u have one...

and now u will be profitable (40 in a row) less spread...
  • #10
  • Nov 5, 2007 7:08pm Nov 5, 2007 7:08pm
hahaha.... very nice thought!
"The market pays you to be disciplined"
  • #11
  • Nov 5, 2007 7:13pm Nov 5, 2007 7:13pm
Quoting tdion
Seems a bit extreme, but losses can come like there is no tommorow....

You Martingalers would be gone after the first 15 or so?

Not to divert this to a Martingale thread, but Martingale doesn't necessarily mean 1, 2, 4, 8, 16. Nor does it mean 1, 1, 2, 4.......
Well you don't need to have 40 losses in a row... 1 loss could do it without S/L where ur margin gets called and ur entire balance is gone... The chances of getting 40 losses in a row is very small theoretically (not taking account for spread and etc.) it's about 0.000000000091% (NO JOKE!)

With spread.... it's much higher = P (with a spread of 3 pips the chance of 40 losses in a row is about 7%)
  • #12
  • Edited 9:38pm Nov 5, 2007 9:06pm | Edited 9:38pm
yes i can.... theoricaly, i bancrupt with holding about many loosing trade with 2 cent a pip for every trade of course : and when i almost get margin call, i close em in a rush

edit : remove the number , it is not necessary i guess
  • #13
  • Nov 5, 2007 9:17pm Nov 5, 2007 9:17pm
Quoting turbokaos
So it would be a kick in the nuts but I would still be standing (bent forward)


thats a perfect visual for MM!!
Relax and be happy.
  • #14
  • Nov 6, 2007 1:02am Nov 6, 2007 1:02am
Hey Scott.

Thanks for the suggestion. I Googled Oscar and I like it. Are there any other betting strategies that you like?

Regards.

Quoting smjones
Rather than D'Alembert, look closer at Oscar's Grind, if you still want to use a progression. At least Oscar's Grind is not a negative progression. D'Alembert is still a negative progression even though you are adding and removing numbers from the sequence.

I do not agree with using any form of negative progression.
  • #15
  • Edited 5:07am Nov 6, 2007 1:07am | Edited 5:07am
If you were risking 1% of your account on every trade and had 40 losses in a row, you would still have (.99)^40 = 67% of your original account. That's the power of proper money management!
Domo Arigato, Mr. Roboto!
  • #16
  • Nov 6, 2007 1:33am Nov 6, 2007 1:33am
Let's say that you had 40 wins in a row, where each win increased your current account by 1%. Would that mean that you had increased your account by 40% of the original? No! Your account will have increased by (1.01)^40 - 1 = 49%. Again, the power of proper money management.
Domo Arigato, Mr. Roboto!
  • #17
  • Nov 6, 2007 8:55am Nov 6, 2007 8:55am
The other flip side is that if you have 40 wins and 40 losses in any order, your account balance will change by (1.01^40)*(0.99^40)-1=-0.399%

So even if you have 50% wins/50% losses your account will decrease slightly over time.
  • #18
  • Last Post: Nov 7, 2007 3:58pm Nov 7, 2007 3:58pm
Quoting tdion
Hey Scott.

Thanks for the suggestion. I Googled Oscar and I like it. Are there any other betting strategies that you like?

Regards.
Yes, there is something else. Write the formula on a white board for Parrando's Paradox and just think about it for a couple of days. You will be amazed at what you see. LOL

Rachets are great, especially with a mostly losing set of trades. We will call them game B(2)
An example of a nice rachet
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: GBPUSD 103007.gif Size: 16 KB
0 traders viewing now