Is it true that anyone can succeed using any strategy? - Page 2
Page 2 of 733 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 321

Thread: Is it true that anyone can succeed using any strategy?

  1. #11
    Has anybody attempted to test something easy like a moving average crossover system with a high RR, state a stationary 3:1 with stops in the low of the candle or anything like this along with the profit target 3 times the halt? A accuracy will be profitable, 70% losses when the market ranges.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    Just those with a positive expectancy. As soon as you have an method with an edge you need two pillars: money management and plogy. You have a chance at making it, once you've got all 3.

    3 Pillars:

    1) Method with the Edge
    2) Money Management
    3) Plogy

    Missing any of these three and you're never going to make it (over the long run).
    .... Very well said.

    Any egy with no 3 elements will take a trader to where a headless chicken ends up.

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    I'm afraid not. If you've got a little wiener, it does not matter who is currently using it, it still won't triumph.


    1. There is not any such thing as using cash management. All traders handle their cash - because they base their conclusions, some are better at doing so than others.

    2. A system does not HAVE to be appropriate over 50 percent of the period in order to be successful (I presume you're speaking about a win percentage here). Since the winning percentage is only one parameter in a mathematical expectancy...
    1 - To appease you I should have worded it 'specific principles and proficiency of appliion of cash management', as MM in itself is obscure.

    Two - I never said a system needs a win% over 50 percent to be successful. I was talking to someone who thinks that you want some advantage on the market in sign, what edge win% could be if over half are wrong.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    I have to say I do not quite understand your post.
    It's my view that arbitrary entries and great cash management will inevitably cause you to shed from the long-run.
    Exploiting a border and no cash management will as well cause you to shed from the long-run.
    You can only win at the long-run in case you exploit a border and employ good money management.
    That is my position regarding this subject.
    I must say I don't quite understand your position on the subject.

    You state to win in the long run you want an'edge' and cash management, in terms of winning signals, what'edge' is there if a machine spouts less than 50% winning signals? The'edge' of this machine doesn't lie at the signals the sl, but at the maths about it, the tp moving quits, tracking, including and so on.

    My stance on the subject is, whatever makes money over the long run, works.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    I have to say I don't quite understand your position on the subject.

    You state to triumph in the long run you will need an'advantage' and money management, in terms of winning signs, what'advantage' is there in case a system dissipates significantly less than 50% winning signs? The'edge' of this machine does not lie at the signs but at the maths about it, the tp, the slmoving stops, tracking, adding and so on.

    My stance on the subject is, whatever makes money over the long run, works.
    What you mentioned is perferct illustration of a Headless Chicken Strategy.

    Ps - The problem here isn't a system generating 50% or less and more then 50% winning trades. The advantage means A method that's logically capable to yield greater profit than reduction by always following standard rules. No money management technique can generate an edge. Challange me on that so that I have an excuse to give you a piece of my thirty-year research and titles of two Vegas Casinos who pulled me out three years aside for only temporarily taking chances on MM methods.

  6. #16
    Price data represents a paradox that is beautiful. It approximates a walk, especially. To put it differently, price data almost* fits the definition of randomness. There are a few extremely profitable traders. Why? Because price charts are just the scoreboard. If you are watching a soccer game, you are probably not going to have the ability to predict the outcome of the sport by watching the score only--you want to see the players, know about the players (research), keep track of who has been hurt recently ect... New traders, do not read into my words here, I am only using an analogy. What I am saying is that you want to start taking a look at things aside from price data. Price should not be your most important inputs.

    Here is a fast example so you can think about the market perhaps a bit differently:

    November 30th price spiked in EU due to multi national government interventions to assist the EU banks with liquidity issues. Consider that. Price totaled almost 250 pips at a little. Was there data at price data that foresaw this activity prior to the event occurring? I submit to you that it wasn't. Replace the actions of government intervention at the case with Hedge Fund Alpha Omega placing a 200M buy order and causing price to spike momentary--possibly triggering stops and momentum traders to ensure it is an movement that is exceptionally volatile. Again, previous price data did not specifically predict this occasion -- as a plane flew by not if the hedge fund was trading.

    Am I stating that price data is of no use? Au contraire mon ami! Price data is far from random...(insert paradox here).... Until further price data comes together and makes it seem random. Employ some frequent sense and you just need to inform yourself a LITTLE BIT and you'll be able to begin lots of clutter from your decision making.

    One more thought. . .So we knew the spike NOV 30th was the outcome of a government intervention. It's not often that we know with certainty who only transferred the market...I sold the heck out the market the next couple of times. Why?

    I'm going to shut up now and go make Christmas cookies with the family... I agree 100% with Mr Vegas Goose Man. He also wrote the book and I drew a picture.

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    two - I never said a system requires a win% over 50% to be successful. I was talking to someone who believes that you needs some edge over the market in sign, what edge win% could be if over half are mistaken.
    An edge just means you've got a positive expectancy. It isn't important how many transactions are mistaken. If I have a system which gets me 500 pips for every 50 pips risked, and that I win 25 percent of these transactions I have an edge. As I said, the winning percentage is only 1 parameter in the equation. It is only 1 part of the puzzle.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    Everything you just mentioned is perferct example of a Headless Chicken Strategy.

    Ps - The issue here isn't a system producing 50 percent or more and less then 50% winning trades. The edge means A method that is logically able to yield more profit than loss by following standard rules. No money management technique can generate an edge. Challange me so that I have an excuse to give you a bit of my thirty-year research and names of two Vegas Casinos who threw me out three years apart for just briefly taking opportunities...
    I'm with you on this one but....
    That I CHALLENGE YOU


    I really am very intriguing to see your research and thoughts about the matter

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    i am with you on this one but....
    I CHALLENGE YOU


    I really am very interesting to see your research and ideas about the subject
    Somewhere in eurousd thread there are few gaming rules. Let me find them. This situation is greatest explained by rule number # 2.

    This rules says something like: There is no limitation to how much profit an individual would like to see but there's always a definite limit to how much reduction an individual can afford. The challange is to prove this statement incorrect without having a definite edge employing any MM based method. I tried for years but ultimately surrendered.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    What you just mentioned is perferct illustration of a Headless Chicken Strategy.

    Ps - The problem here isn't a system producing 50% or less and more then 50% winning trades. The edge means A method that is logically able to yield greater profit than reduction by consistently following rules. No cash management technique can generate an edge. Challange me so that I have an excuse to give you a bit of my thirty-year research and titles of two Vegas Casinos who threw me out three years aside for just temporarily taking opportunities...
    I feel that the matter is rather a lack of clarifiion on which an'border' means and then assumptions about it, because that is exactly what I addressed, somebody said you want an edge plus mm, subsequently mentioned that a 20-30% winning system can win over the long run, which means that the system that's worse in picking entries than 50/50 requires some adjustment of sl/tp scaling/adding to make it win out. So here is a conflict of definitions, an edge in win rate over 50% with tp sl, and then adjusting tp sl to get a method win rate. With less than 50% chance of winning the only way to make it profitable is to correct the sl scaling/adding or even tp. This adage letting winners run and cutting losses short plays a role here.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners.