C4 Scalping

I guess we can't effectively apply the full method as explained by Edge in the simulator. I am just practicing taking into consideration the rest of the detonators.

Regards

JC

Edgetrader - Great call in recommending this book. I read it over the weekend (and, I'm sure, will re-read it several times before it sinks in) and am glad I did. I have a much clearer view of what you are trying to teach and believe my trading will improve as a result.

Thank you

The plans presented in this thread have already been backtested, and quite extensively at that. I am willing to bet that the efforts you are trying to do are over a 24 hr. period. This because the MT4 simulators are geared for such. That is a mistake.

The threads purpose is to show a few individuals how to 'trade' for a living. I was not intent on spending exorbitant amounts of time having alot of folks waste such on plan viability. By trading the plan in a demo capacity, time and effort is focused to that which really matters. Can a person trade a simplistic plan by design?

Perhaps it was a 'trust' issue to a new follower as this is understandable. However, I am by no means in the habit of just throwing stuff out into the FF for people to just play with. Just not my style. I will provide only that in which the 'grunt' work has already been completed.

As such, a review of the front page states that this methodology is not tailored for those with little to no trading experience. This is where I introduced this in a militaristic type approach.

C4 and the current Mt4 Nitro are not for 'boots'. They are designed for those with some experience. One does not just walk in to a recruiting center and ask that they be trained to proficiently handle explosives in a few weeks. It takes a certain discipline to deal with such materials. That takes time and efforts to develop.

While I see by postings and such that this thread has a pretty good amount of members and visitors, it has started to contract recently and this is a good thing. It indicates to me that there are less and less 'holy grail' seekers and allows those who stick a better opportunity to gain a bit more focus.

Pretty much the same in the military. Not everyone who joins a program initially passes the muster. Again, this is simply a numbers game. Some look at this is an advanced educational course. I myself have promoted this as more in line with graduate work as opposed to entry level credit courses. For simplicity sake, let look at this another way.

Think of this from a Naval Aviation perspective. You are now at the 'Top Gun' training facility. You should be here based upon your previous achievements and possess the capability to excel further. If not, you will be exposed as lacking the discipline to engage yourself in this level of training and will return to your previous posting for more 'seasoning' which will allow you to gain more experience.

This is by no means Trading 101. This methodology takes a bit of nerve, a ton of commitment and complete faith in your trading plan. That trading plan is your co-pilot. Without unwavering trust you will soon have real problems. In 'Top Gun' you should be learning to improvise, adapt and overcome. It is not for the timid and shy. Here you either:

Learn and earn.

or consequently you

Learn or burn.

Regards.

Should you stick with this type methodology, it will become your trading bible.

Good work.

Regards.

Edge,
As opposed to backtesting, I think an opportunity to instruct C4 recruits may be possible on the "Trade Simulator" (more specifically the LFH_Trading_Simulator_3) posted to this forum. I have found that you can use it to review the day's signals in the same manner a "Top Gun" trainee would use a flight simulator to master a specific manuever on an F15-E.

If the C4 recruits utilize their template, follow the rules, and then trade the correct time frame, they can watch the signals in much the same manner as when trading live. They can enter one trade at a time when the signal presents itself they can see if they followed the rules correctly.

There are obviously some caveats as a C4 recruit can "cheat" the system a number of ways but in reality, if they are cheating the simulator they are learning absolutely nothing about the strategy and will be frustrated when the market deals them a harsh lesson based on their cheating.

Pesonally, I find this strategy is as much about self-discipline, self-honesty, trust, and determination to succeed as a trader as it is about trading successfully for a living. You will get out of it what you put into it.

I am using the simulator to help review my mistakes so I can learn from them and not repeat them.

Could you share with the thread these backtest results for the plans as currently defined in post #1?

Was MT4 used for the backtests? If not, did the indicators used for C4 backtests have the exact same parameters as in MT4 -

TRIX (2,1,1,1)
LWMA(10,3,6)
DX Trade Info - last 3 lines - Momentum(4), TRIX (5m), TRIX (15m)

You have continued to state about the 25% mechanical / 75% mental part of these plans. How did the backtests account for the mental parts of the plans?

When and where did this occur?

If you read ALL the thread you will find the answer. Suggest that you invest some time in this if you want to succeed in trading.

The plans presented in this thread have already been backtested, and quite extensively at that. I am willing to bet that the efforts you are trying to do are over a 24 hr. period. This because the MT4 simulators are geared for such. That is a mistake.
The threads purpose is to show a few individuals how to 'trade' for a living. I was not intent on spending exorbitant amounts of time having alot of folks waste such on plan viability. By trading the plan in a demo capacity, time and effort is focused to that which really matters. Can a person trade a simplistic plan by design?

Edge, first and foremost, thank you for ALL yo do for all of us. You have no idea how much it is appreciated .
I would like to let you know that i have been a silent reader of your thread from day 1 and i have been reading it and studying your method(s) ever since.
With all due respect, i think you misunderstood my post. I am not trying to proof the plan(s) here presented by you; i don't doubt your methods by any means; on the contrary i believe in them and like so much your "keep it simple" & "less is more" concepts that i am fully committed to learn them because i don't want get burned "again" . I believe that not only you are teaching us great methods, but you are also teaching us lots of great lessons in money management and other trading requirements to help us become successful traders. I think very highly of you and i think you are a very wise person with a great helping hearth.
All i am trying to do is to practice, practice & practice as you constantly teach us here. When i work on the simulator i am just trying to develop the proficiency to read the signals and push the plunger based on them. The only additional indicator i have in my C4 template is the C4 Focus time, which shows me the time ranges you advise us to trade on, and i do ALL my practice on those time frames ONLY (when practicing C4), the rest of the time frames i just accelerate the simulator and skip them.
I am fully committed to become on of Edge's graduates some day in the future; that is why i practice, practice and practice some more.
Highest regards
JC

Are you saying extensive backtest results have been posted to this thread for the current C4 plan as defined in the 1st Post?

You've got to be kidding! I have read every post in this thread, some many times over, and there are no backtest results.

We are being asked to take on faith that this trading method is profitable. Given the number of systems that have been presented on FF, certainly you can't blame people for being skeptical and asking for some proof.

And consider that this system that has supposedly been "backtested, and quite extensively at that", has changed multiple times over the past month. The indicators have changed and the parameters for those indicators have changed.

So it is tough, indeed, to accept a stranger's word that this system is profitable.

Personally, I think the approach here is viable. And as such, I choose to dedicate many hours of my time to forward test it. But I think it isn't fair to flame people who are a bit more skeptical than myself.

Hi Edgetrader:

The question of extensive backtesting maybe valid considering the rules/indicators for C4 have changed since thread inception. Is there something I do not comprehend? I am not challenging you in anyway, Edgetrader, it is only my observation. I have read the entire thread. Edgetrader, I am not asking you to prove anything and you don't have to.

Let me say that Edgetrader has been gracious enough to share his system. I for one am thankful. I applied his teachings to an idea but talk about it elsewhere out of respect. Let Edgetrader have his thread without it being stepped on by other methods, systems, indicators, etc... You are free to start your own thread, discuss your ideas there and share your indicators there. If we show each other that one courtesy, there will be no need for ignoring or banning.

I was replying to Texas Trio's post. Are you Texas Trio? Imposter ....

Many forward test screenshots have beeen posted .... as I said READ THE THREAD.

No doubt if backtests had been performed and posted you would have ridiculed backtests as useless!!! Honestly!!

If you're unwilling to trust what's being said about the system by its author (and fair enough, if you are), and you're unwilling to do him the courtesy of reading the thread (and checking the posted trades to your satisfaction), then so be it ..... in this case the thread has nothing to offer you. Move on, and save yourself (and those who do wish to learn to trade the system) a lot of wasted time.

Goodbye and best wishes, zznbrm ... or Texas Trio .... or whatever your handle is.

okay everybody this thread is free...the only person paying the price here is Edge.

So you now want Edge to come up with proof now on this Free information and teaching. I think Edge already has his hands full trying to teach all the "want something for nothing...prove it to me now newbs"!

Many traders here even if shown all the backtesting results will still become a statistic and part of the 95% who don't succeed.

If you haven't yet realized who you are dealing with here...maybe you are in the wrong place...sometimes you need to take an educated leap of faith. My leap of faith here has doubled my account already...that is enough backtesting for me.

Thanks again Edge for your dedication and patience! Sorry for the rant!
Q

DocPMD .... not sure why you felt moved to reply to my reply to another poster, but I think that the sentiments I express in my post above may apply to you, also ..... if you're not convinced, or not sufficiantly interested to do some research and forward testing yourself, then so be it.....

Why not investigate other trading systems that you feel have more potential, and save your time and effort for that more positive endeavour?

Can some kind person explain if (and how?)the Aqua and Gold dots on the Scalper Candles are used in C4 (or Nitro)?

rorieu

about 6000 posts, 400 pages - 2 systems
good idea to place thread navigation in first page (links to key issues (incl. summaries, back/forward tests, faq, etc)

Let me just clarify my position.

I think that this system has potential. Thus I am spending time here to learn. I, too, am thankful that Edge is gracious enough to share his knowledge.

I just think that it is unfair to jump on every person who makes a post that might be construed as negative.

Certainly neither Edge or anyone else had any obligation to prove anything to anyone. But when very strong statements are made, you've got to expect to get a response!

If I were Edge, rather than make a controversial statement like "has been extensively backtested . . ." (without offering the backup), I would have been a lot less politically correct and said "listen, I have traded this system profitably for a long time. Either choose to believe it or not, but stop cluttering my thread."

I would have been perfectly satisfied with that answer.

You can see by the number of posts that I have made that I don't speak very often. Perhaps I was just in a bad mood, but it is annoying when a valid question is asked (about backtesting) and the person is then ridiculed.

Hi Rorieu,

these dots are not in use - they only show the close of a single PA and it doesn't depehd on the candle-colour as the candle-colour shows the TRIX-colour.

Regards

zznbrm ..... with all due respect, are you simply trying to question the system's credibility, or do you have a more sinister (commercial) motive for requesting backtest results?

And since you note in your post that the system's author has stressed repeatedly in his posts that trading this (and any other manual) system is 25% system and 75% trader dependent, how can representative backtests be obtained and presented?

You're clearly intelligent enough to know this; so it seems to me that you're intention here is just to cause trouble, and spoil the thread. If that is the case .... shame on you (and Texas Trio, if he is the same person).