MTF Trading System - fxozgirl Higher Time Frame spinoff

[zader]

Like your presentation.

I think although meets up rules, but does not meet the requirements for the purchase.

My personal understanding of trading rules, should not continue to open in 30 GBPNZD purchase items.

Should wait for a back end, again in line with the trading rules for GBPNZD conditions when buying.

If GBPNZD reverse, that we should wait for a eligible for the sale of trading rules, for sale.

Small personal views.

Thank you for your great work, cheers!

You are spot on cad0811 , its a work in progress and is still very very basic, it hasn't got any re-entry logic to it yet, which is why I've got DD on EURNZD + GBPNZD(-400pips) , I'm thinking of setting the EA to stop trading after SL hit so we have to re-enable it when we think its retraced enough, so you can blame yourself and not me
Any other ideas that must be easy to program, remember I ain't not too smart at this.

[fxozgirl]

I think posts like "rkkgs" are the reason Steve gets so shouty sweary banny sometimes, thats banny as in to ban not the urban dictionary's meaning which you can google yourselves.

Absolutely, hopefully rkkgs will do himself a favour & do some research himself. I'm only too happy to help people, but you have to want to help yourself as well

[intcust]

gbp jpy continues to disapoint

[intcust]

pretty flat after the big move. Hey non farm this Friday. Should be good test and lots of pips. Gotta love the green with so little time involved. Thanks again John and Shelly.

[spotdespot]

You are spot on cad0811 , its a work in progress and is still very very basic, it hasn't got any re-entry logic to it yet, which is why I've got DD on EURNZD + GBPNZD(-400pips) , I'm thinking of setting the EA to stop trading after SL hit so we have to re-enable it when we think its retraced enough, so you can blame yourself and not me
Any other ideas that must be easy to program, remember I ain't not too smart at this.

How about just putting in a check that mirrors Shelley's re-entry? So basically when a down trend is valid on Weekly and Daily then just check that there are 2 down candles on the Daily then enter. So yesterday's close is lower than the previous close and today's close is lower than yesterday's close. Vice versa for up trend.

I think you'd just have to add the logic regardless of whether it was a first entry or a re-entry as otherwise it would get a bit complicated as you'd have to loop back to find it there was a previous valid entry?

Cheers,
Dave.

edit: I think you just need something along the lines of:

Code: Select all

         if (Close[1] < Bid)
         if (Close[2] < Close[1])

[spotdespot]

Another alternative borrows from Shelley's BASA creation and that is to only enter when the 3 and 8 SMMA's are diverging, which I think would solve the issue too?

I can dig the code for that out of BASA if you think it might be worth looking at.

Cheers,
Dave.

[zader]

How about just putting in a check that mirrors Shelley's re-entry? So basically when a down trend is valid on Weekly and Daily then just check that there are 2 down candles on the Daily then enter. So yesterday's close is lower than the previous close and today's close is lower than yesterday's close. Vice versa for up trend.

I think you'd just have to add the logic regardless of whether it was a first entry or a re-entry as otherwise it would get a bit complicated as you'd have to loop back to find it there was a previous valid entry?

Cheers,
Dave.]

I think applying that logic to the GBPNZD trade in good DD now wouldn't have worked.
The trade ran from open of X to SL on the wick of Y, so on open of the current trade on Z we had 2 up candles & bid > close.

GN.png

sorry if I've not understood that correctly my brain hurts.

[spotdespot]

I think applying that logic to the GBPNZD trade in good DD now wouldn't have worked.
The trade ran from open of X to SL on the wick of Y, so on open of the current trade on Z we had 2 up candles & bid > close. sorry if I've not understood that correctly my brain hurts.

Yes - you're right. Mmmm. Maybe thinking about it too simplistically. I need to do some proper head scratching.

[spotdespot]

I think applying that logic to the GBPNZD trade in good DD now wouldn't have worked.
The trade ran from open of X to SL on the wick of Y, so on open of the current trade on Z we had 2 up candles & bid > close. sorry if I've not understood that correctly my brain hurts.

Ok - I think I have worked out a relatively easy way to avoid these situations. It needs a bit more research but looks good for now. I will take some more time to look at it this evening. I hope I am able to explain it easily.....

OK - what we are basically saying is that for a re-entry we need a pull back and we don't want to be jumping in at any random place whilst price is going UP (for a long I'll use GBPNZD as the example).

The idea is simple - at the start of the day (as you are using opens I believe) we check all the normal validation criteria and if a signal is valid we only take it if during the previous day (so the day just ended) the H4 EMA(13) was at some point RED (easy to check) AND is now BLUE (not sure what colours people use but you will see below).

Have a look and see what you think.

EDIT: I should really have put another red line on the H4 chart to show that when the current trade was taken it would not have been seen as valid given the H4 check. Hopefully that is fairly obvious.

Maybe this should all go in a sub-thread to Shelley's as I am conscious of cluttering the thread. Shelley?

Cheers,
Dave.

So for GBPNZD:

[zader]

Yes - you're right. Mmmm. Maybe thinking about it too simplistically. I need to do some proper head scratching.

I'm still favouring a halt to trading after a SL, the very wise man whose forum we're in posts this before every EA release >
This is not a set-and-forget ea; there is no such thing and anyone who tries to claim there is, is either stupid or lying. This ea requires frequent manual intervention.