002097's PwR scalping auto trading robot by Steve Hopwood | Page 28 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Trying scalping with a 1000 bucks - Scalping is expensive! 39 replies

1M & 5M Scalping System (Scalping Paradise) 21 replies

Random Auto Scalping to Profits 36 replies

PwR EVA 16 replies

MoForce's PwR System 25 replies

Attachments: 002097's PwR scalping auto trading robot by Steve Hopwood
Exit Attachments

002097's PwR scalping auto trading robot by Steve Hopwood

  • #541
  • Sep 18, 2011 4:14am Sep 18, 2011 4:14am
Quoting SteveHopwood
Peter, Gi makes no reference to crossing the Slope line and so is a different bot to the one you describe here.

I have coded umpteen x crosses y trigger bots. I do not think it is coincidental that none of them are being traded live. Test your idea manually for a few days and I will code it if you think it might have legs.

Hey, Steve....how's that, it's not referencing Slope? What's "John's Miraculous Added Sauce"? Sorry, but you lost me....
Quote
For the last months I've been testing/trading the Aurora system manually. At the same time I started to implement what I now like to call Aurora's even hotter sister; Gi.
She uses the Slope Direction Line as main and only indicator.
She trades longs when the candle's body is above the line and shorts when it's bellow the line opening pending orders like Aurora does but she don't care about Hh Hl, etc... That is, at the opening of a new bar, same R:R
I don't say
  • #542
  • Sep 18, 2011 9:25am Sep 18, 2011 9:25am
Quoting dragosd1
Hey, Steve....how's that, it's not referencing Slope? What's "John's Miraculous Added Sauce"? Sorry, but you lost me....
In the latest Gi is is implemented using Replicate_Slope_Indi() and GetSlope() without referencing to the external inidi(s).

Regards, Paul.
  • #543
  • Sep 18, 2011 10:58am Sep 18, 2011 10:58am
Quoting pah
In the latest Gi is is implemented using Replicate_Slope_Indi() and GetSlope() without referencing to the external inidi(s).

Regards, Paul.
That I know, so you won't need the indi at all, as it is "virtualized" into the EA, but still, EA is based on "internal" Slope Direction...right?
I don't say
  • #544
  • Sep 18, 2011 12:38pm Sep 18, 2011 12:38pm
what do you think to use this system with a martingale fibonaci progression? We don't need larger account with this SL. A progression like 1,2,3,4,6,9,13,19 i think is good.
  • #545
  • Sep 18, 2011 3:38pm Sep 18, 2011 3:38pm
Quoting dragosd1
That I know, so you won't need the indi at all, as it is "virtualized" into the EA, but still, EA is based on "internal" Slope Direction...right?
Oh for crying out loud, which bit of the mostly single-syllable post 1 here, and pah's equally simple reply to your idiotic question do you not understand?

Do not reply. Your continued participation here hangs by a thread. Just do the damn reading, and some damn thinking, and work these bone-basic things out for yourself.

Ok guys. here and in the jor thread I have had to endure increasingly stupid questions by increasingly stupid 'contributors'.

Those of you who know me are doubtless sitting back and awaiting the explosion. I have done my best to remain within the spirit of, 'Encourage the dim, however thick they may be and however stupid may be their questions' ethos of FF, but I cannot stand it any more.

From now on, it is open season on the thickies. The next dimwit to post a question that demonstrates with the earth-shattering conclusiveness of some of the recent posts, that either he/she/it cannot be arsed to read my posts, or cannot be arsed to take the time to understand them having skimmed over the +2 letter words, gets a full-barrel shot of a Steve special.

If that doesn't deter the morons, I shall restrict posting in these threads. Most of you are wishing I would do so anyhow.

In the meantime, at least we can have some fun at the expense of the stupid.

  • #546
  • Sep 18, 2011 3:39pm Sep 18, 2011 3:39pm
Quoting huckcheever
what do you think to use this system with a martingale fibonaci progression? We don't need larger account with this SL. A progression like 1,2,3,4,6,9,13,19 i think is good.
Imbecillic. Go away.

  • #547
  • Sep 19, 2011 7:34pm Sep 19, 2011 7:34pm
i stopped testing Aurora after getting killed on a 4 digit account. and apparently it doesn't work well live?? too bad...
  • #548
  • Sep 19, 2011 7:37pm Sep 19, 2011 7:37pm
Quoting SteveHopwood
Oh for crying out loud, which bit of the mostly single-syllable post 1 here, and pah's equally simple reply to your idiotic question do you not understand?

Do not reply. Your continued participation here hangs by a thread. Just do the damn reading, and some damn thinking, and work these bone-basic things out for yourself.

Ok guys. here and in the jor thread I have had to endure increasingly stupid questions by increasingly stupid 'contributors'.

Those of you who know me are doubtless sitting back and awaiting the explosion. I have done...

agreed... stop asking dumbass nooby questions unless u wanna get your ass banned for life from steves threads... i'm sure if u had half a brain u could figure it out yourself by reading through the thread properly or by getting off your fat (__!__) and doing some research.... anyway , i have question, what is a pip?
  • #549
  • Sep 20, 2011 2:33am Sep 20, 2011 2:33am
Quoting suetombo
agreed... stop asking dumbass nooby questions unless u wanna get your ass banned for life from steves threads... i'm sure if u had half a brain u could figure it out yourself by reading through the thread properly or by getting off your fat (__!__) and doing some research.... anyway , i have question, what is a pip?
Hmmm .... A very heavy risk taker
not sure taking that level of risk is going to be an asset in trading

Over to you Steve ....
  • #550
  • Sep 20, 2011 2:36am Sep 20, 2011 2:36am
Quoting suetombo
anyway , i have question, what is a pip?
  • #551
  • Sep 20, 2011 7:04am Sep 20, 2011 7:04am
Quoting huckcheever
what do you think to use this system with a martingale fibonaci progression? We don't need larger account with this SL. A progression like 1,2,3,4,6,9,13,19 i think is good.
Do you even know what the fibonacci numbers are? AFAIK 4,6,9 and 19 aren't fibonacci numbers...
  • #552
  • Sep 20, 2011 6:22pm Sep 20, 2011 6:22pm
Aurora has been taking some pretty heavy losses this last few days. I haven't tried the CCI version yet, but some tweaking needs to be done I think. The tweaking needed is probably end-user driven and not in any way related to the EA programming.

I think I may try a set stop loss and take profit. So many good trades end up getting stopped at b/e and I think the overall P/L is being affected by this.

Out of interest, how has the manual Aurora strategy been doing this week so far?
  • #553
  • Sep 20, 2011 6:41pm Sep 20, 2011 6:41pm
Quoting ukdaytrader
Aurora has been taking some pretty heavy losses this last few days. I haven't tried the CCI version yet, but some tweaking needs to be done I think. The tweaking needed is probably end-user driven and not in any way related to the EA programming.

I think I may try a set stop loss and take profit. So many good trades end up getting stopped at b/e and I think the overall P/L is being affected by this.

Out of interest, how has the manual Aurora strategy been doing this week so far?
I have A on my live account, so I am using every filter available. CCI kept me out of most trades today (set to 100/-100) and I came out at breakeven - 1 win and 1 loss.

  • #554
  • Sep 21, 2011 2:48am Sep 21, 2011 2:48am
Quoting SteveHopwood
I have A on my live account, so I am using every filter available. CCI kept me out of most trades today (set to 100/-100) and I came out at breakeven - 1 win and 1 loss.

You're using CCI?

Only kidding. That's next on my list.
  • #555
  • Sep 22, 2011 3:52am Sep 22, 2011 3:52am
I am using Aurora on live - yesterday 1 win. Also i am testing GI for 1H max candle 50 and min candle 10 I am going to go live with this settings as well.
  • #556
  • Sep 22, 2011 3:59am Sep 22, 2011 3:59am
Quoting lizu
I am using Aurora on live - yesterday 1 win. Also i am testing GI for 1H max candle 50 and min candle 10 I am going to go live with this settings as well.
Good luck. Live, I am keeping my risk doen to 0.2% in case Aurora turns out to be a failure.

  • #557
  • Sep 22, 2011 9:53am Sep 22, 2011 9:53am
There's TWO elephants in this room.

Neither is part of the original strategy, agreed.

1. The option to place immediate orders rather than opening pending stop orders when there is a trade set up.....

IF I HAD THE OPTION of OP_BUY or OP_SELL on a trade set-up, I'd run with high % risk and low % BEP.

2. Turning off PWR would be a sweet option to have. This is a scalper, not a trend follower! That is, it breaks my heart to see so many trade set-ups not worked during retraces because PWR is only in the mood to sell....This elephant 2 has a lot to do with elephant 1 of immediate trade placement with tight BEPs.

Steve Hopwood!!! Your work is an inspiration to all the wood-ducks like me. We sweat the code trying to work out how to code. And 3 years into my mission to learn it, the thing I love about YOUR code is the comments you leave us ....almost as a trail of bread crumbs to follow.
  • #558
  • Sep 22, 2011 10:39am Sep 22, 2011 10:39am
Quoting dancingphil
IF I HAD THE OPTION of OP_BUY or OP_SELL on a trade set-up, I'd run with high % risk and low % BEP.
dancingphil,

I am sure you have your money management strategies well planned. But I would determin my % risk on the basis of my average win against my average loss, etc. When these are not know (as in Aurora's case), I would err on the side of caution.

Khalid
  • #559
  • Sep 22, 2011 11:08am Sep 22, 2011 11:08am
Aurora live 2 wins = 2% today.
Gi 3 trades 2 BE 1 win 1% (1H )
  • #560
  • Sep 22, 2011 11:43am Sep 22, 2011 11:43am
Quoting lizu
Aurora live 2 wins = 2% today.
Gi 3 trades 2 BE 1 win 1% (1H )
Hi Lizu,

If I may ask, what setting do you use for Aurora? Mine with CCI filter hasn't placed any trade for today!

Thanks!
0 traders viewing now