As im typing this BE+1 was hit
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Ratios & Harmonics: a Different Way to Trade
- #18,263
- Mar 16, 2016 7:54am Mar 16, 2016 7:54am
- | Joined Dec 2013 | Status: Trader | 1,118 Posts
{quote} I got taken out at B/E as well. I agree, I think it's going down. Once I saw that the candles highlighted in the green circle had no follow through I was expecting a deeper correction. {image}
I was able to re-enter. Not a great price so I'm managing it aggressively.
{quote} We will get to them but the foundations comes first. I want you to understand that the patterns are setups and like all setups some will work and some will not' If you are able to process the information on the chart with accuracy and confidence then you become empowered to make better decisions and determine which setups are worth taking and which are not.
I just want to make sure not missed any videos.
- #18,266
- Mar 16, 2016 8:39am Mar 16, 2016 8:39am
EURUSD 4 hour chart:
Just be careful of the shorts, as there is a big structure range that currently the price is sitting at the bottom of.
I went long a couple of days ago based on the below outlook (but I am really good at picking the wrong direction!!!)
Just something to throw in there.... especially when you look at the order flow has seriously weakened... does not mean it will not go lower, but just a red flag... and crossed fingers for me!
Just be careful of the shorts, as there is a big structure range that currently the price is sitting at the bottom of.
I went long a couple of days ago based on the below outlook (but I am really good at picking the wrong direction!!!)
Just something to throw in there.... especially when you look at the order flow has seriously weakened... does not mean it will not go lower, but just a red flag... and crossed fingers for me!
- #18,268
- Mar 16, 2016 9:43am Mar 16, 2016 9:43am
- Joined Sep 2013 | Status: OTM AI IntelliWave™ Trader | 1,107 Posts
Trading in the shadow of SM
Hello Traders, Money management can be a very simply formula vs extremely complex formulas but the bottom line is that it should be a formula that takes into account the kind of trader you are. I say this because the balance on you account whether gaining or losing will be a major factor on emotional control. We want those emotions as far away as possible from your process. So your money management strategy need to compliment your expectancy. It also needs to compliment your emotional tolerances from DD as well as gains. Money management is suppose...
oh my God, on seeing the numbers in the pdfs, it look some big stuff here. I have read the entire pdf once but frankly, I don't understand anything in this. Will have a strong coffee and reread again.
It is tough for me to understand 
- #18,272
- Mar 16, 2016 5:25pm Mar 16, 2016 5:25pm
- | Membership Revoked | Joined Jul 2010 | 9,273 Posts
If you fail to plan, you plan to fail.
How do I translate this into Forex and lot sizes? :-) This looks like it's for futures and contracts. I'm trying to make a spreadsheet but not doing very well. lol {quote}
- #18,276
- Mar 17, 2016 1:18am Mar 17, 2016 1:18am
- | Joined Dec 2014 | Status: Trader | 1,008 Posts
Hi guys, I see a lot of you use the rule tool in Ninja to show how many pips you did per trade. There is a better tool for that which is free right here: http://rainbow-in.com/feature/enhanced-trade-visualization/
Hi everyone. I discover this thread two days ago and I started the lessons Mr Pip re-shaped from page 78x-ish. I've read 20 pages so far, as fast as I can.It's changing the way I approach the charts, I'm super excited with all the stuff I'm learning.
I want to thank Mr Pip for this, thank you very much
and I hope I can catch up with you guys in some weeks. I'm just 200 pages behind 
. See you in a while!
I want to thank Mr Pip for this, thank you very much
and I hope I can catch up with you guys in some weeks. I'm just 200 pages behind . See you in a while!
- #18,278
- Edited 5:04am Mar 17, 2016 4:42am | Edited 5:04am
This is what I came up with so far, but it's based mostly on risking 2% of your account balance. Assume a $2k starting balance, assume risking .02 (2%) per trade, assume that means the lot size is 0.3 [I checked and currently 0.30 is EURUSD and 0.34 is USDJPY, based off a 130 point / 13 pip stop loss). Max stop loss of 130 points. I rarely go that large on a stop, but it is my max so I use that value. You'll have to either 1) leave default SL or 2) adjust lot size then per trade based on SL, which is pretty easy, if you know the other data points.
It comes out to reaching 216 pips before "leveling up" to the next add-on lot size. This is based on how much it costs per pip, how much gain per pip. And then taking the 0.3 lot size and dividing it by the initial balance it takes to risk that much, and then dividing it by the add-on lot size to come up with a growth number $666 to get you to the next level so that when you add-on you are still not risking more than 2% per trade max. This is because I wanted to not risk more than 2% in any trade, and if you level up too fast you end up risking 4, 5, 7% and such. Largest expected drawdown % is .2 (20%), which comes out to LED$ ($400.00) initially. I feel that is acceptable. But that remains constant when you "level-up" and it's based always on your max risk/trade and losing 10 trades in a row, (although because math, it probably comes out to around 11 or 12 losses, since you lose less every time you lose...). According to the "method" as soon as you level-up, if you go below that level-up base balance, you immediately go back down to the previous level to protect your capital until you again go above the required balance. *Although I just realized as long as you stick to the plan and don't blow through the 20% expected drawdown, you'll never get to a point to where you have to level-down. Again this is because you're not risking more than 2% per trade. A side-effect of never increasing your risk per trade. I guess if you ever break 20% expected drawdown you would have to revisit the plan, or your strategy, or take a break or something...
How long does it take one to get to 216 pips (2160 points on 5 digit broker?) ... I typically get 13-40 pips per day. For me, that's a wide range. But assuming an average of 20 pips per day means I would level up every 10 days, or 2 weeks. So, with this method (assuming every day is a winner day, hah!) you would double initial balance in 8 weeks. You Double that balance in 12 weeks. 24 weeks later that new balance is doubled. At 1 year, the original balance would be $18,666. Fun stuff.
I found this site describing the method for forex. But I'm not sure if this is the exact method as described in the book. And i'm still not keen on the risk required, but that's just me. http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/37084/investment/fixed_ratio_money_management.html
It comes out to reaching 216 pips before "leveling up" to the next add-on lot size. This is based on how much it costs per pip, how much gain per pip. And then taking the 0.3 lot size and dividing it by the initial balance it takes to risk that much, and then dividing it by the add-on lot size to come up with a growth number $666 to get you to the next level so that when you add-on you are still not risking more than 2% per trade max. This is because I wanted to not risk more than 2% in any trade, and if you level up too fast you end up risking 4, 5, 7% and such. Largest expected drawdown % is .2 (20%), which comes out to LED$ ($400.00) initially. I feel that is acceptable. But that remains constant when you "level-up" and it's based always on your max risk/trade and losing 10 trades in a row, (although because math, it probably comes out to around 11 or 12 losses, since you lose less every time you lose...). According to the "method" as soon as you level-up, if you go below that level-up base balance, you immediately go back down to the previous level to protect your capital until you again go above the required balance. *Although I just realized as long as you stick to the plan and don't blow through the 20% expected drawdown, you'll never get to a point to where you have to level-down. Again this is because you're not risking more than 2% per trade. A side-effect of never increasing your risk per trade. I guess if you ever break 20% expected drawdown you would have to revisit the plan, or your strategy, or take a break or something...
How long does it take one to get to 216 pips (2160 points on 5 digit broker?) ... I typically get 13-40 pips per day. For me, that's a wide range. But assuming an average of 20 pips per day means I would level up every 10 days, or 2 weeks. So, with this method (assuming every day is a winner day, hah!) you would double initial balance in 8 weeks. You Double that balance in 12 weeks. 24 weeks later that new balance is doubled. At 1 year, the original balance would be $18,666. Fun stuff.
I found this site describing the method for forex. But I'm not sure if this is the exact method as described in the book. And i'm still not keen on the risk required, but that's just me. http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/37084/investment/fixed_ratio_money_management.html
{quote} If you are ready with the spreadsheet please share the same
Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent - JMK
- #18,279
- Mar 17, 2016 5:48am Mar 17, 2016 5:48am
- | Joined Mar 2016 | Status: Trader | 1,068 Posts | Online Now
Mr Pip I have a question on price action.
In the screenshot I've attached you see a nice burst of momentum which I put a cyan line next to. However then you see that the move was retraced back almost 100% however did not close beneath the start of that momentum leg.
How would you take this?
I would think that you would not want to see strength retraced like that and any retracement that doesn't go past 50% of the momentum leg should still be taken as bullish, right?
Or can we also take this as bullish because bears did not close underneath the start of the leg?
In the screenshot I've attached you see a nice burst of momentum which I put a cyan line next to. However then you see that the move was retraced back almost 100% however did not close beneath the start of that momentum leg.
How would you take this?
I would think that you would not want to see strength retraced like that and any retracement that doesn't go past 50% of the momentum leg should still be taken as bullish, right?
Or can we also take this as bullish because bears did not close underneath the start of the leg?