DislikedThats easy, use iBands and take the Upper line value minus the Lower line value. If the answer is greater than the Average True Range then ......
Scoobs.Ignored
Nanningbob V5: Steve Hopwood's auto-trading robot
- #422
- Aug 30, 2010 3:09pm Aug 30, 2010 3:09pm
- Joined Jul 2009 | Status: Trader | 2,158 Posts
Scoobs
I was wondering why it is that when applying for CFD or Spreadbetting accounts with UK brokers they state that they can not offer these accounts to US Citizens. To me this is crazy, it is like during prohibition bars in Mexico and Canada would refuse to serve US citizens.
When I was a student a lot of my friends migrated to USA, I am glad I stayed in London.
Kind Regards
I dont know for sure but I assume also that Spread betting ofshore is also banned.
Basically they just want the money to stay in USA.
This is also why they are planning to make it difficult/illeagal or impossible for US based citizens to have foreign forex accounts.
I find it strange that a country that allows its citizens to bear arms (and in some states machine guns) doesnt want they citizens to have more leverage than 10:1
Having said that I still love the country for other reasons.
Scoobs.
- #424
- Aug 30, 2010 3:36pm Aug 30, 2010 3:36pm
- | Joined Nov 2006 | Status: Trader | 1,143 Posts
Looks like I'm also getting the double orders as well 
24 hours in a day – 24 bottles of beer in a case – Coincidence? I think not
I'm looking for an indicator, or some piece of code, that will tell me when a pair have an abnormal volatility, for example when today ot yesterday daily range is wider that it's average daily range of the last x weeks
Thanks
(the idea is to NOT allow the robot to trade when this condition occurs)
max that is very good idea.....
it will save us from bad entries...
cheers
ps.your version works good ...thanks max
- #426
- Aug 30, 2010 6:00pm Aug 30, 2010 6:00pm
- | Commercial User | Joined Apr 2007 | 8,331 Posts
Steve,
Shouldnt the ReEntryLinePips = iATR(Symbol(),PERIOD_H4,14,0)/Point;
So, for GBPJPY it would be around 75 pips (4 digit) or 750 (5 digit).
But hey if it aint broke then dont fix it.
Scoobs.
PS. Just a suggestion so dont hit me with your empty whiskey bottle(s).
Scoobs' suggestion caused me to look at the code and realise that I have put Max's variable re-entry line pips calculation in the wrong place, so the bot is working on your ReEntryLinePips input, not those provided by Max. The fix is in post 1. It makes a vast difference in back testing.
Scoobs, thanks for the idea. I confess it had not occurred to me to use Atr to calculate the re-entry. I am going to do nothing about it for now, as a gj 75 pip reentry seems a bit on the tight side.
On the
But hey if it aint broke then dont fix it.
It is frequently working on outdated information via the global variables that can get left in place when the market has moved inside the green lines without triggering a trade.
I shall be looking at this over the next few days. Would someone care to save the current versions as "xxxxxxxx was profitable", so that when the fixed version looses a fortune, we can return to it?
I am only half joking. It aint bust, but I am going to try to fix it.
- #427
- Aug 30, 2010 6:25pm Aug 30, 2010 6:25pm
- Joined Jul 2009 | Status: Trader | 2,158 Posts
I never hit doggies with anything. They tend to have sharp teeth and respond badly to anything move violent that tummy-tickles.
Scoobs' suggestion caused me to look at the code and realise that I have put Max's variable re-entry line pips calculation in the wrong place, so the bot is working on your ReEntryLinePips input, not those provided by Max. The fix is in post 1. It makes a vast difference in back testing.
Scoobs, thanks for the idea. I confess it had not occurred to me to use Atr to calculate the re-entry. I am going to do nothing...
Cheers
Scoobs.
I never hit doggies with anything. They tend to have sharp teeth and respond badly to anything move violent that tummy-tickles.
Scoobs' suggestion caused me to look at the code and realise that I have put Max's variable re-entry line pips calculation in the wrong place, so the bot is working on your ReEntryLinePips input, not those provided by Max. The fix is in post 1. It makes a vast difference in back testing.
Scoobs, thanks for the idea. I confess it had not occurred to me to use Atr to calculate the re-entry. I am going to do nothing...
On the principle, I am tempted to leave unsaid what I am about to say because the bot has been fabulously successful. The fact is, though, that there are problems with the coding logic.
It is frequently working on outdated information via the global variables that can get left in place when the market has moved inside the green lines without triggering a trade.
I shall be looking at this over the next few days. Would someone care to save the current versions as "xxxxxxxx was profitable", so that when the fixed version looses a fortune, we can...
Yes, people, please save any version you are backtesting, give it a solid name and keep it on your hard drive. We don't really have an archive of the versions of NB v5 EA (it's always the latest in post #1) so if we later find we all headed down a wrong path, it would be good to have the previous versions available in case we need to revert.
cheers
Simon
- #433
- Aug 31, 2010 12:53am Aug 31, 2010 12:53am
- | Commercial User | Joined Apr 2007 | 8,331 Posts
Whoops, my mistake i meant ATR(DAILY) so using GBPJPY as an example would mean 230 pips on 4 digit broker or 2300 on 5 digit broker. But hey i will leave this one alone for the time being as my teeth are rather blunt from eating to much.
Cheers
Scoobs.
I like this idea and am going to code it as an option. Thanks.
- #439
- Aug 31, 2010 4:38am Aug 31, 2010 4:38am
- | Commercial User | Joined Apr 2007 | 8,331 Posts
I have found some solutions.
Talking of solutions, there is a ludicrous thingy going on here in the UK at the mo. Everything commercial is a 'solution'.
On the side of a van last week: the name of the contractor followed by this gem: "Intelligent Drainage Solutions".
Intelligent drainage solutions? Does this mean that I might get thickie solutions if I call in a different firm to unblock my drain?
Or, how about this cracker on the side of a van yesterday: "Total Non-Food Solutions". Wow. So now I know whom to go to if I need a bazooka? A Gerbil? A flight to Mars? Ye Gods alive. Give me strength.
Enough if this gibbering frivolity. To my own Total-Non-Non-Forex Solutions.
Talking of solutions, there is a ludicrous thingy going on here in the UK at the mo. Everything commercial is a 'solution'.
On the side of a van last week: the name of the contractor followed by this gem: "Intelligent Drainage Solutions".
Intelligent drainage solutions? Does this mean that I might get thickie solutions if I call in a different firm to unblock my drain?
Or, how about this cracker on the side of a van yesterday: "Total Non-Food Solutions". Wow. So now I know whom to go to if I need a bazooka? A Gerbil? A flight to Mars? Ye Gods alive. Give me strength.
Enough if this gibbering frivolity. To my own Total-Non-Non-Forex Solutions.
- The business of trades being taken when the market has moved back into the killing zone:
- For reasons only known to my deepest darkest inner psyche, I had removed the routine that checked that a trade setup was still valid. Actually, my DDIP probably had now't to do with it; the whiskey is the more likely cause. Replacing it should fix the prob but hey, this is me we are talking about here, so don't be surprised if the bot takes to firing off trades at random.
- The double trades. I finally got one this morning, an hour apart, and noticed something that none of you other dead-heads were bright enough to spot. The entry points were different, but the tp was the same. Hmmmmmmmmm. Now, what causes that? Hmmmmmmm. Here is what I think was happening:
- NB spots a trade trigger, thinks, "Ah ha. Setup ok. There is a trigger. Time to party" and calls the trade send function.
- The ttf used to have a call to a function that checks for an existing trade and abort the trade if one already exists. Trouble is, that made Recovery trades impossible, so it had to go.
- Which meant that NB, being a well-behaved, nicely brought-up bot did as expected and sent the trade.
- At which point, it discovered that there are two trades open, thought to itself, "Yippee. We are in Recovery mode" and set both the tp's to achieve breakeven.
It is dimly, vaguely possible that the post 1 fix has sorted all this out. Just don't hold your breaths, ok?