100% Win Math Grid Ea

Hi: I was checking all the Ea versions on this thread and running some test of them, and I see that the developers have tried to do some changes here and there trying to minimize the risk and the frequency of the possibility of reaching the death trade, however, I see that the mayor problem with these EAs is the huge amount of unnecessary orders that these Eas open and nobody seems paying attention to that.

For instance, I see that in the first version the ea open 3 trades at once at the first level!!! and from there start tripling the lots every time the price touch one of those levels. Later versions open 1 buy and 1 sell pending orders at first level, and once one of the orders is executed, it start placing 4, 5, 6 pending orders in the opposite side of the trade to cover the only 1 trade that is open. That's insane!!! There is not account that will handle that, even if you have a huge account and trade micro lots. In the best case scenario, assuming that you have still money to continue trading, there will be a point where the broker won't let you open more orders because you reached the maximum amount of orders allowed.

There is not one single reason for these EAs to do that. If you want to have more orders in one side of the trade to always close in profit, you just need to double the lots, as a normal martingale system will do, starting from 0.10, 0.20, 0.40, 0.80, 1.20, 2.40 and so on to the amount your account balance can handle (that is up to you). What this ea is doing is jumping from 0.10 lot to 0.50 or 0.60 lots. That way this ea will never work, it will make you a lot of money one day, two or three, but the death trade is waiting for you around the corner to wipe your account.

When trading with martingale, as others contributors have said, there is no way to avoid the death trade 100%, it will happen soon or later, but there is ways to prolong the life of the EA to some point that when the death trade happens you have already and at least, double, or triple your account. In that case, who cares if the death trade happens, start over again and keep collecting money, but with that math calculation that this Ea is doing, no way you can achieve that.

I am not a programmer, so I can not fix it. I know how to fix small things in a code but changing all those algorithms, I can't. Maybe someone will be willing to do that. I propose changing the amount of open lots only to the double or maybe less, like martingale at 1.5 and changing the take profit target a little farther or starting with 2.0 martingale and when it reach 4 or 5 trades without reaching the take profit level, reduce martingale to 1.5 and adjust the take profit level few pips more, and if after doing this, still is not closing in profit, so put a parameter to close everything at break-even. I think one of the versions have the BE parameter but with those huge amounts of lots open at the same time is very difficult to achieve it. At least it didn't work in any of the test I run.

Other thing that I will advice you guys is trading up to one level only, and adjust the level increment to 1/3 or 1/4 of the Previous Day Range Average so hopefully you can cash in every day. Adding indicators to the Ea trying to catch the trending moment to avoid the ranging market is a good thing and can help, but as I said before, even with all those filtering, if you place 6 lots in one side of the trade to cover 1 lot in the opposite side, or 8 or 10 lots to cover 2 lots in the other side, this just doesn't make any sense.

I remember that the person who started this thread said at the beginning "this is a martingale with steroids strategy" So I advice you guys to live the steroids aside and keep playing only with the martingale, which is dangerous enough by itself, so imagine with steroids!

Hopefully someone will agree to modify this, that will be great! At this time there is no way I will use this ea live. I will keep trading this strategy but only manually, and I will try to reach the profit target only once per day. And once I reach it, I am done for the day. And next day just place pending orders again, collect profit and go, till the next day.

Regards

I think the last guy is right, we need another version. It opens too many orders at once, and still goes into the death spiral too easy.
Maybe it needs another indicator coded in, like a stoch, or something.
Thanx in advance.

this EA is not perfect cos there are missing MM settings, but basically this is the main body anyway.

I have worked almost such kind EA almost 6 months, 24/7 in each day .... but in my EA there were some mistakes. This one is quite good if to use some manager EA what buts some trailings or maybe even to use break even offsets and levels.

You just must know your risk level and thats it. And one more thing .... you must use strategy as well .... for example, dont keep your money all the time in one acc, take some of it away if your acc are doubled or ect.

I think that's right. This ea will work, as long as you use a MM tool with it, which is now coded into the last two ea versions.
I'm trying that now. It looks like its working real well.

Hi to all the folks reading this thread,

From time to Ive posted here and Ive met some great contacts care of it.

If you've read what Ive posted you'll know Ive been on my own journey with regards my own 100% win math system, Ive poured over a years of work into it, with many very creative features, over 100 settings in fact and its a completely handfree trading system that backtest over wide range of currencies, the max loss on any basket I got to below 10% for still 10-20% monthly ROI. This is marketly less than any other system of it type - not sure about the EA that this thread is based on.

Over the previous 3 years Ive built several EA from concept to final end product, most based on 100% win math or cost averaging thinking. I am/was also a keen observer of the Blessing project.

However I have recently (finally) come to the conclusion that any form of martingale or cost averaging system is just an eventual accident waiting to occur...........and belive me when I say Ive put in more, dedication and developement into EA's than I am certain probably most if not every person reading this thread. Designing systems and trading FX is a full time gig for me.

Perhas some of you reading this might suggest I'm a naysayer, or have just given up on the idea because I couldnt make it work. Well certainly I couldnt get it to work relaibly in live fwd tests, I can confess that much, but a naysayer most defitely not, otherwise I wouldnt have invested all this time and money into the development of such a beast of an EA system. I thought of nothing else for an entire year, such was the strength of my belief and dedication to the product.

Anyways, I am 100% over the 100% win math concept, and any cost averaging system. For those in some doubt, consider the amount of work thats gone into the Blessing and later the Evo, and after all this time the system recently crashed after not a long fwd test by Ratz - its looks like its going stellar, until it just hits ones loss and wipes out several months of gains. If this doesnt spell it out for you, then keep on headed down this path. One day I suspect you'll come to recall this post and say to yourself, yep you know he was right after.......but like me you'll first ignore such posts

For what it worth what I did get out of the 100% win math project of mine - is the firm belief that martingale/cost averaging just skews the odds of success so much against you - because the risk you lay for a single trade - and lets face it usually not anything less than 10% (like mine), if not 50% for these systems - just does not equate to the return on each trade - which is usually a fraction of 1% (or in case of mine, up to 5-10%). Eventually its enivatble you'll hit a rouht patch and even just one 10% loss might take at least 2-4 weeks to make up with my system. Now to try and recover from a 50% drawdown is almost fanciful if you copped the 50% loss in the first place, think about it.

Even if you see success for a while, just keep in mind what a couple of losses will do to you account then ask yourself how long will it take to recover? Its slow process, at best.

So, its forced me to get back to basics, thinking about good money management where the potential reward is greater than risk on each, and where lot size remains consistent relative to balance, and back to using just 1-2% risk per trade and relying on the affectiveness of the trading edge to make gains - not the extreme reliance on money management pursuant to martingale/cost averaging strategies involved with 100% win math + cost averaging systems.

After a year of slog, and over 10k in coding costs, I ran with a different concept involivng the sue of more "sensible" trading rules, and in under a week produced an EA that absolutely blew my 100% win math grid out of the water...... The different is like night and day.

Backtest reveal between 10 and 40% month, for between 3 and 15.8% drawdown over 7 pairs using 1-2% risk per trade, with about 50 trades a month per pair. All pairs test stellar back 10 years on the backtester....but I dont put so much to that for other reason too detailed to go into here and now. Decent numbers I'm sure you'd agree. I arrived swiftly at these care of the very limited number of system inputs that allow for swift optimization (unlike my 100% win mather which might take me 20 or more hours to a arrive at just one set to run a live fwd test, and even then only a year to date test -anything longer bombed) ..........and of course an affective edge!

I let it loose on live FWD demo and out of the box its turned in excess of 100% in under two weeks of trade, with a max drawdown of 11%, and this is the very first test over 158 trades over 7 currencies pairs. All but one currency pair made money. At this rate the account will se a 400% plus return for the month, and yes using just 1-2% risk per trade, and the system live fwd test stats show average winner is greater than twice the size of the loser, winning percentage is about 60%. One small losing day in testing, with up to a 28% upsike in one day, 20% days are not an uncommon event to date...........and I say this knowing full well the significance of the performance achieved.

Look I'm not saying this big note myself, rather to impart my experiences for what benfit they may be to any of you reading this thread in exchange for the favourable interaction Ive had along the way here, and the good folks Ive met on this thread.

Ill leave you with this 20 cents worth - sincerely after much R+D I believe your time is much better spent pursuing other concepts that dont involve martingale or cost averaging. Its takem me several years of banging my head against a brick wall to arrive here.....save yourself some time and the same pain

Sincerely, Adam Liddiard.

Hi Adam,
your comments very appreciated.
Would you eventually mind telling a bit more which is the alternate direction you've chosen to follow? It doesn't necessarily mean unveiling your "secrets", but at least indicating a research avenue...

Bye

BL [a secret long-time, deep-involvement lurker of this nice thread]

yes man ... you have almost right ... if you lose firstly 50 percent then it is almost impossible to recover and in that case there you dont control situation anymore, then your emotions start play that game

Hi BL,

Well though its getting off topic, and with all due respect to the fellow who's started this thread - my thoughts are as outlined above, stick with whats more commonly accepted as prudent money money management, ie no martingale or cost averaging, and risk just 1-2% per trade and to have at least the potential of a higher reward than risk for each trade. Thats all you need to turn 10-40% a month per currency pair if the system is affective enough, Ive the proof of that. If 1-2% risk per trade isnt enough, then you're on a difficult path to make system work long term because the risk is so much greater trade to achieve a similar level of return, thus the losers hurt that much more and are so hard to recover from. System with positive RR dig themslves out of holes much, much quicker than if the RR is inverse. The slope on the sides of the holes is also a much steep gadient with inverse RR..........versus the more gradula incline of systems with postive RR. Snakes to downside and ladders to the upside, if you get me.

Some systems have proven to be affective with an inverse RR ratio (like for instance the Shocker EA), provied they maintain a very high level of accuracy. Thats about the best commercial sclping EA I could name with an inverese RR, a buddy of mine has done quite well with it....and the Megadriod if left alone....just quietly. But a bad loosing run with inverse RR is devasting to such an account/system - the situation is exactly the same /even worse with 100% win maths system - a losing run and its game over. You just hope you dont see that loss before you've "doubled your account and taken risk capital out" (how does that get bantered about, yet I believe the truth is very few actually achieve that). Frankly Ive never doubled a demo or real money account with one of these system in the years I have used them. Perhaps some have..........but then they probably gave it all back too. I think you wont find many/if any successful long term 100% win math grid users - and if there is an exception to this rule then impress everyone here by posting a 6-12 month track record on myfxbook, or a statement, and I mean live FWD test statement not a hypothetical backtest. Even if I saw such a record or system.......I would still pass, the risk remains the same.

What happened to Buru system that IBFX Australia was running (which I think is rather close to the 100% win mather here)............I dont even need to guess (I dont see it being advertised anymore)..............but the folks running IBFX are either clueless about such systems, or they knew full well and still decided to back it. I tend to think they were clueless....let us be nice about it and provide them the benefit of the doubt. My system was, for the record, a very advanced version of the way the cashcompunder (which I only discvered AFTER I started my project, and I derived nothing positive from it) ran with lots effort given to initial entry, and factors involving detection of trend, support and all sorts, and a heap of different ways to attempt to limit losses.......you be surpised just how may ways you can try (in vain) to limit losses.

I would tend to suggest that efforts be concetrated in the area of high speed scalping to take maximum advantage of the speed of execution thats possible via the software available to us over trying to code a system that a human can trade. What I mean is run a system that human cant trade even if they wanted to due to the speed of order mods, initial order placements etc. To do this your efforts need to be focused in exploiting short aberations in price, either reversions to the mean or alternatively - breakouts. The system I run does its thing so fast that no human could possibly place the orders like it does nor modify them at the speed it does, it uses the maximum available processing power available via a MT4. Think about it for a minute........it makes so much sense to harness the speed of execution available by a MT4, it is an edge in and of itself so you might as well focus on using it! This system is absolutely at the limit, and am looking at ways to get closer to the market like with an API. (currently I do see success at least on demo with 71ms latency involved to the brokers server, and 71ms aint that fast, to their live account which is in the same server centre as our VPS its just 2ms).

Keep it simple, too.. if its one thing I have definitely learnt is that complex doesnt mean better. If it requires complexity, start again. The simpler you can make it, the better in my view. My new system uses 1 indicator, then reverts to a mechanical price action based order modification theme thereafter. Very simple - just a trigger, then a succession of moving SL quickly to limit looses, and then to trail the price until reverses. There are no other filters or rules involved, no timezone issues or GMT BS and it loves the news (when most system run for cover this thing puts its hand up) and it runs 24 hours day on 7 pairs. Obviously the trigger I use will be kept under wraps, but the moving of SL in close to limit losses and then to trail is nothing new. Its the combo of a good trigger, and this quickly limiting of losses and trailing for maximum upside that is the key to success with my system. I'm pretty certain that other triggers could be used while retaining the current price action based order modification prcess that occurs immediately on and after entry.

All this being said.......... tell me how many scalping system trade with a higher rewards potential than risk potential on each trade and are successful...........it is indeed a very rare thing. I'm not sure quite why, other than it seems to be an accepted norm and that the systems triggers just arent accurate enough to run with tighter SL's. Mine runs with MAX 3-6 pips stop losses and has seen up 33 pips gain on a trade, so it can be done. Over 158 trades to date (in the past 2 weeks) the av win is still in excess of twice the size of the loser...for its 103% gain with 11% DD (and thats with 1 bad pair running of the 7 pairs traded). All trades are hard stopped at the outset, ie the 11% DD is a true max figure - not the deceptive ones you see with the likes of martingale and cost av system which only register the bigger realised loss (versus the max open postion drawdown).

Funny thing is, 6 month ago I hated scalpers with a passion...........but of late Ive more come to understand their virtues having dislodged a very large chip on my shoulder about them. Obviously spread is big factor and so is the execution quality, and latency - but with careful attention to those factors then its most definetely one of the most profitable ways to trade the FX market.... I get it now. The difference in the potential between a scalper and 100% win mather is like night and day. I should post some links to some data so you can see for yourself...........if I was to lay out the results of everything Ive been able to achieve with regards backtest and fwd testing I've done on the 100% win mather, alongside what Ive achieved my my scalper in 2 week, there's just no comaprison, different leagues in perfomance. The 100% win math is complete rubbish by compare, as soon as saw the evidence I didnt spend another second on the 100% win mather......its blantanly obvious.

Heck I might even just free source my 100% win mather EA and the manual and the backtests and sets Ive developed.............go knock yourselves out with it. 10k worth of coding and year of bloody hard work, it does have within its capialibilities the ability to run just single trade system no martingale and thats where Id have been focusing efforts if I went further with it - it has a lot of entry filters and rules and uses multiple indicators and timeframes to do its thing. Ive some stellar looking backtest that hardly loose a trade setup this way. The coder said months ago it is by far his beggest single prject ever..............so much effort was expended on this thing.

If you're interested BL, Ive a variation of the successful scalper concept I created in mind using different trigger but with same price action based order modification prcess that is a key element of success of my EA, it would be very simple to code up, I think maybe 3-4 hrs work. Now, I dont code myself so am reliant on those with that skill set, so if you're willing (and able) to do one pro bono then Ive some ideas I'm willing to share if you're willing to write the code. In the due course of time I'll be exporing these same ideas on my own EA and Ive no issues paying for this get done with our current coder, so my offer here and today is my ideas in exchange for you doing the code. My email is [email protected]

Not really interested in the commercial release route, my position is that the best system are not released into the market......and why would any sane person do that? My own plans including running MA/PAMM on decent amount of AUM, asset management is the nature of the business of NMi, the maths is so much more compelling than selling copies for $99 on clickbank....and once an EA is commercially released, its cracked inside a week, without exception. You can not properly protect an EA, something do with the inadequacies of the language in which ist written, or something...the IT geeks know the story better than I do. Bottom line if you release an EA, you have to accept that it will get hacked and turn up on bootleggers sites for $10-20. Most folks are honest, but it only take 1 dishonest cracker who doesnt respect IP for it turn up to bootleggers sites where more folks that dont respect IP can readily access it for much less than the price on clickbank asked for by the vendor.

When I compare the performance of my system - which surely isnt the best system ever created versus what else is out there on the net - nothing even gets close - except for one system. I could rest my case here, the best EA's are not released, they are simply to valueable. Even the one that does come close is very restricted in what you can trade it on, and the developer doesnt give anything away about the system. Personally I believe he's cleaning up on the other pairs with it that the EA cant be traded on.......as I am. He's smart enough to realise that there is a limit to the liquidity available at any one instant in the FX market and if there's too many folks trading the same system, then you WILL eventually run into a liquidity problem, then come the bad fills and the loss of performance in the system. I know some traders (in fact they are broker) that trade large volumes and they have to put special procedures and system in place to get their orders filled. There are most certainly limits to liqudity regardless of the overall daily tornover in FX, to believe otherwise is to be naive - keep in mind us traders (ESPECIALLY SCALPERS) want fills in an instant - we dont get to draw down on the 3 trillion over the course of a day - its like BANG - I want to sell 200 lots in 2ms's. Calculate what 200 lots is worth if required every 2ms (which is the order size on my system/1M account balance).....its a heck of a lot MORE than 3 trillion day.

Better sign off here and let this 100% win math grid thread continue without these interjection about non 100% win mathers.

Cheers, Adam

Hey Viracoccha - firstly thats a damn hard hard name to remember how to spell without looking at multiple times!

gee i thought FX was hard! ....hehe

But on your comments of the human condition/emotion - I confess that in 7 years Ive not been able to tame that beast - though I'm much better than I was. Its something that only a few can really do.

Humans are for the most unrelaible and inconsistent, and they get sick, have families and want holidays.

hence.....robots are the way for me.....and as abominable as most of them are and have proven to be, on average the do better than humans simply because they dont have an emotional element to them. They otherwise do mostly contain the same flawed concepts that make most human designed trading system fail though!

Cheers, Adam

Hi Folks,

The least I can do here is share my (non 100% math) system journal development notes with you, so that you can see some of the evidence that provides the basis for my opinions, probably I'll update weekly (the document available at this link) from here on in.

http://new-millenniuminc.com/wp-cont...st-journal.pdf (ps, BTW our website is rather out of date, and further my webman likes in Bangkok Thailand, so he's about 6 feet under water at the moment and rather unable to do much that requires an interent connection.....but the blog is updated monthly by me)

Again apologies on the interloping with non 100% win mather here - but like I say it was developed off the tail of a very long 100% win math project - that I just couldnt win.

As some measure of contribution to the 100% win math concept here - anyone here wants a copy of my 100% win mather and provided there's no issue/objections in providing it here, Id be happy to arrange for it be available via a link (which will require the help of my web man because I'm friggen useless at doing that stuff, and its a monster ZIP). Just ask, in the meantime you can email me and I'll send it out that way. No catches, except to say dont expect a lot of support for it from me/NMi (because my focus/time is elsewhere), its got a manual, a load of backtests and SETs and the manual does list the functions and provide a brief explanation of them, but some of the settings and their affect will not be apparent or understable without further explanation. Its a bloody complicated beast with 100+ plus settings and once its in trade you better not change settings on the run or log into other accounts. It can run continuously, or you can tell it when to start and stop each day which is the way I found it ran best....with gaps from between 20 and 50 pips if you want 100% mather, with take profit grid of between 10 and 25 pips thereabouts.......it runs a single layer long above, short below. Plenty of scope to tell it where and why to reverse direction of the next in line grid trades and the like, and to tell it to hang onto basket for longer when the trend is strong/obvious (via 4 X TF CCI idea from Blessing, but also with ability to tune this indi via the channel and period values) Mostly you'll need to learn by trial and error. I would suggest your focus be on the understanding of its entry rules and try to run it with a single entry (forget the 100% math) and a nice tight stop (which currently is activated by a % equity cut - not X pips which stumps folks). Actually there's some single trade tests and sets amongst it all.

Good lucks, its hard work, but you're welcome to it........

Cheers, Adam

Hello Adam,
thanks for interesting comments. It is a good job

P.S. Sorry, can you send me EA system (super scalper)? My email: [email protected]

Thank you. Regards.

WOW, Adam! How to thank you? Actually: I asked for some more hints, and you're here with a "magistral lesson"...

Keep in touch!



Bye

BL

.... yes Adam, .... all is true, no one cant beat their emotions. But why I like that grid EA? Here is two reason and this is that I dont like indicator based EA because:

Firstly, they late with their signals and secondly they show us past ..... always past. Because of those indicators are not good thing (this is my opinion) and they causes brain cancer

So, my thought is that you need something else. In the other hand, every EA may work IF you used always SAME strategy. You cant change your settings all the time, then you are bankrupt.

I try find some solution here with MM settings. I have orked similar EA ower 6 months in 25/7 in day .... I know potential of that system ... and yes it may blow very easily.

... besides that .... trend is your friend and you must follow trend, not a opposite way .... trend is master and you are follower.

I trade always with little money .... to test that system with 10 000 dollars or so is pointless. So, I have little thoughts here, if I manage find here something interesting then I will post my results after two weeks. If my 200 dollars survive 2 week then its OK. Btw, I trade 24/7, I dont use exact trading times. But yes ... sideways/hovering trend is worst scenario in here at the moment.

o.k., so, um, It looks real good so far, on a $3000 alpari demo. If I do three swings, starting with .01 lots, and then a MM of RR 1.
made a little less than $300 on 6 charts.
Now, what I'd like to do, is to stop it, let it rest a while, and then start all over again, starting with .01 lots for 3 swings, etc.
So, how am I going to do that?
In other words, I don't want to keep 'martinagaling', I just want to 'start martingalling' from where I am now....make another $300, stop again, start again, etc. Is that possible?
Do I have to close out the $300 bucks some how, or can I start from the, $3300 I've got in there now?
This is my idea to avoid the 'death spiral'.
Can I get a witness? ( The Beegees)
Does anyone understand what I'm trying to do?
Is it possible?

Can I just turn off the ea s and then turn them back on again, after a period of time, and then the sequence would start all over again?
Is it going to be that easy?
If so, how long would I have to wait to start again?

Should I close out all the pending orders first?

Hi do you optimize it or use only setting on post 1311?
thanks!

so ... I promised give my feedback also about that EA ....
I dont savad my results because that was not needed to do.

So ... that EA may(probably it work) work IF there are really lot of money in your account.

Reason why it is so is that after some time EA starts increase lots and it happens really quickly. So you need money .... there is some logic how EA makes orders but sometime there are not ....

This is true that EA work when there are movement ... dont turn EA on if there is sideways movement .... when is sideways movement??? We never know that.

Whats more ... you need some MM settings. I used one Trailing EA. That helped me a little. I managed that EA a week ... yes that is not much time and my acc was not a big one but I wached that EA 24/7 and it was good and bad same time .... there is risk as much as there is potential ....

In the end I had some system what hold whole that system in balance, but there were "death spike" what waited its opportunity. So if you deside yse that EA in that condition then be aware.

Hi, very interesting thread.
Is there a method (XLS spreadsheet or else...) to simulate how many lots (or micro or mini) to enter the first trade ... to avoid margin call ??

For example. My account is 12000 $ .. if I enter first trade with 0,1 lot.. how many "cycles" can my margin support before blowing up ??
And what if I enter the first trade with 0,2 lots ?? And what if ....

Is there an xls calculation/simulation spreadsheet in which insert starting lot size, number of "cycles", leverage >>> to obtain margin required to substain account ?

Thank you in advance.

M.