DislikedThis is the template for this system without any modification. I hope you all like itIgnored
EMA 25-50 Trading System (Detailed)
- #1,922
- Jul 24, 2008 12:53pm Jul 24, 2008 12:53pm
svlad,
I've looked a little into your codding for the pip counter.
Please check the following:
1) In the conditions checking the buffers for which TP or SL we are at, the PipForSL*point and PipForTP*point is missing in all the short conditions;
2) In TP1 for example, profit = PipForTP*Point,
But in TP2, profit = 2*PipForTP*Point; in TP3 it's 3*; etc
3) In SL, loss is 4*PipForSL*Point;
4) In SL_After_TP, it depends on the TP reached:
For TP1 reached, SL=0 (breakeven);
For TP2, SL=2*PipForTP*Point (of profit) = 2 quarters * PipForTP*Point;
For TP3, SL=2*PipForTP*Point (of profit) = 1 quarter * 2*PipForTP*Point;
etc.
In other words, you work with quarters, so putting it in numbers to visualize better, with a TP=SL=30, reaching:
X -> -(30+30+30+30) = -120 pips;
TP1 -> 30+0+0+0 = 30 pips;
TP2 -> 30+60+30+30 = 150 pips;
TP3 -> 30+60+90+60 = 240 pips;
TP4 -> 30+60+90+120 = 300 pips.
The bold numbers are those you have to include in your calculations for each SL or SL_After_TP - the previous will have already been calculated in the previous TP.
I hope you get what I mean?
Trying to keep busy while waiting for ron's news on the EA.
I've looked a little into your codding for the pip counter.
Please check the following:
1) In the conditions checking the buffers for which TP or SL we are at, the PipForSL*point and PipForTP*point is missing in all the short conditions;
2) In TP1 for example, profit = PipForTP*Point,
But in TP2, profit = 2*PipForTP*Point; in TP3 it's 3*; etc
3) In SL, loss is 4*PipForSL*Point;
4) In SL_After_TP, it depends on the TP reached:
For TP1 reached, SL=0 (breakeven);
For TP2, SL=2*PipForTP*Point (of profit) = 2 quarters * PipForTP*Point;
For TP3, SL=2*PipForTP*Point (of profit) = 1 quarter * 2*PipForTP*Point;
etc.
In other words, you work with quarters, so putting it in numbers to visualize better, with a TP=SL=30, reaching:
X -> -(30+30+30+30) = -120 pips;
TP1 -> 30+0+0+0 = 30 pips;
TP2 -> 30+60+30+30 = 150 pips;
TP3 -> 30+60+90+60 = 240 pips;
TP4 -> 30+60+90+120 = 300 pips.
The bold numbers are those you have to include in your calculations for each SL or SL_After_TP - the previous will have already been calculated in the previous TP.
I hope you get what I mean?
Trying to keep busy while waiting for ron's news on the EA.
- #1,924
- Jul 24, 2008 8:12pm Jul 24, 2008 8:12pm
Clayboy,
Hijacked? With all due respect, I arrived at this thread less than a month ago - Effi was long gone.
Nevertheless, I've read ALL the posts since the beginning.
I agree that when this thread started to talk about building an indicator (long before my arrival), it should have been in another thread created for that purpose - but it hasn't, and it's too late for that.
And this thread will eventually die one day, it's destiny.
Don't you think that, if there was no interess in the new insights someone brought to this thread, the discussion wouldn't had last until now?
So if it did, it's because there are people that care for this approach.
Effi is in another thread/system - you can find it on second page, I did, and I read what's new there.
This one hasn't change that much - only lower timeframe (1H), a MACD condition, and programming it into an indicator.
But if you are so interested in this system in its original version, you can always read back to where it was - why do you need Effi for?
There's plenty explanations in the beginning of the thread about when to enter a trade - don't tell me you also want Effi to enter the trades in your place?!
disclaimer: I'm truly a big Effi fan, and read all he writes.
Hijacked? With all due respect, I arrived at this thread less than a month ago - Effi was long gone.
Nevertheless, I've read ALL the posts since the beginning.
I agree that when this thread started to talk about building an indicator (long before my arrival), it should have been in another thread created for that purpose - but it hasn't, and it's too late for that.
And this thread will eventually die one day, it's destiny.
Don't you think that, if there was no interess in the new insights someone brought to this thread, the discussion wouldn't had last until now?
So if it did, it's because there are people that care for this approach.
Effi is in another thread/system - you can find it on second page, I did, and I read what's new there.
This one hasn't change that much - only lower timeframe (1H), a MACD condition, and programming it into an indicator.
But if you are so interested in this system in its original version, you can always read back to where it was - why do you need Effi for?
There's plenty explanations in the beginning of the thread about when to enter a trade - don't tell me you also want Effi to enter the trades in your place?!
disclaimer: I'm truly a big Effi fan, and read all he writes.
- #1,926
- Edited 8:55pm Jul 24, 2008 8:42pm | Edited 8:55pm
I know what it feels like (when you follow a thread, and it changes, but you loved it the way it was) - it has hapenned to me.
For me, this one is how I wanted it to be.
I arrived late, but what caught my eyes was the developing of the system, because I was trading very similar rules, and wanted to develop them and turn them into an indicator - but that didn't kept me from reading it from the beginning, for insights and understanding.
The first post of Effi's new thread (I think it's his most recent):
http://www.forexfactory.com/showpost...92&postcount=1
But it's a different system, his most recent (at least, shared with us).
Good luck!
Toni.
For me, this one is how I wanted it to be.
I arrived late, but what caught my eyes was the developing of the system, because I was trading very similar rules, and wanted to develop them and turn them into an indicator - but that didn't kept me from reading it from the beginning, for insights and understanding.
The first post of Effi's new thread (I think it's his most recent):
http://www.forexfactory.com/showpost...92&postcount=1
But it's a different system, his most recent (at least, shared with us).
Good luck!
Toni.
- #1,927
- Jul 24, 2008 11:33pm Jul 24, 2008 11:33pm
- | Commercial User | Joined Nov 2006 | 1,013 Posts
"One Grows Tall After Walking Through A Forest Of Tall Trees."
- #1,929
- Jul 25, 2008 11:09am Jul 25, 2008 11:09am
Folks,
like I said some posts ago, I've been doing some experimenting with this indicator.
What pushed me to it was the fact that only using RSI/MACD values from the last candle's close allowed us to have signals only at a candle's open, making it possible to see the real TP/SL displayed, and so making the real pip counting possible...
But the fact was that with this change (let's call it i+1 version), it was obvious the results were quite worse, showing a lot more of black crosses.
So after studying it, I've introduced a change to the code, and I've been testing it, having concluded for now the pip counting comparing the original i+1 version with the one with my changes for 3 diferent pairs, for a period from 01/01/08 to 18/07/08.
And for now, the results are, at the very least... very pleasant
I hope to finish the testing and pip counting for 2 or 3 more pairs somewhere next week, and then post a full compairing report for each pair.
I won't have time to work on it this weekend, so...
Stay tuned and see you soon.
like I said some posts ago, I've been doing some experimenting with this indicator.
What pushed me to it was the fact that only using RSI/MACD values from the last candle's close allowed us to have signals only at a candle's open, making it possible to see the real TP/SL displayed, and so making the real pip counting possible...
But the fact was that with this change (let's call it i+1 version), it was obvious the results were quite worse, showing a lot more of black crosses.
So after studying it, I've introduced a change to the code, and I've been testing it, having concluded for now the pip counting comparing the original i+1 version with the one with my changes for 3 diferent pairs, for a period from 01/01/08 to 18/07/08.
And for now, the results are, at the very least... very pleasant
I hope to finish the testing and pip counting for 2 or 3 more pairs somewhere next week, and then post a full compairing report for each pair.
I won't have time to work on it this weekend, so...
Stay tuned and see you soon.
- #1,931
- Jul 25, 2008 7:02pm Jul 25, 2008 7:02pm
tell us your modifies so we can help you counting.
The problem isn't only the counting (in that, I'm now almost as fast as you
), but also getting the right parameters into the code, and compairing then.And I might make 1 or 2 more changes to those parameters/code (I'm studying the possibility), which means I may have to recount the 3 pairs I've concluded.
Don't worry, soon I will bring news, explainning what the changes are meant to do, and the results they achieve.
In the meantime, I bet we would all like to have news from ron... How is it going?
- #1,933
- Jul 26, 2008 11:25am Jul 26, 2008 11:25am
svlad,
I've looked a little into your codding for the pip counter.
Please check the following:
1) In the conditions checking the buffers for which TP or SL we are at, the PipForSL*point and PipForTP*point is missing in all the short conditions;
2) In TP1 for example, profit = PipForTP*Point,
But in TP2, profit = 2*PipForTP*Point; in TP3 it's 3*; etc
3) In SL, loss is 4*PipForSL*Point;
4) In SL_After_TP, it depends on the TP reached:
For TP1 reached, SL=0 (breakeven);
For TP2, SL=2*PipForTP*Point (of profit) = 2 quarters * PipForTP*Point;
For TP3, SL=2*PipForTP*Point (of profit) = 1 quarter * 2*PipForTP*Point;
etc.
In other words, you work with quarters, so putting it in numbers to visualize better, with a TP=SL=30, reaching:
X -> -(30+30+30+30) = -120 pips;
TP1 -> 30+0+0+0 = 30 pips;
TP2 -> 30+60+30+30 = 150 pips;
TP3 -> 30+60+90+60 = 240 pips;
TP4 -> 30+60+90+120 = 300 pips.
The bold numbers are those you have to include in your calculations for each SL or SL_After_TP - the previous will have already been calculated in the previous TP.
I hope you get what I mean?
Trying to keep busy while waiting for ron's news on the EA.
- #1,937
- Jul 28, 2008 1:51pm Jul 28, 2008 1:51pm
I'm beginning to fear from ronmatzkin's long silence
And I don't think anybody else is working on it (nobody else came forward here).
As for me, maybe during this night I will finish and post the report from my testing.
And I don't think anybody else is working on it (nobody else came forward here).
As for me, maybe during this night I will finish and post the report from my testing.
