magft wrote:Iamshakey wrote:ROBST3R wrote:I have played with the settings for the last couple of days!
And this is what i get now when i run a few fast backtests. I know they don`t mean much, but it helps me to get the best settings.
Eur-usd with M15 2011-11-11 till 2012-01-10 start 0.01 lot
The graph shown here with shakey's method (shown in this post) is very typical of the profit graphs when I trade the recovery system manually.
Shake
Shake, good to have you on board. Can you do a visual backtest using your method and let me know if it does what you would expect or if it still needs work. From your thread i still think it is not quite right so it would be good to have your opinion.
Mike
hey mike, Good to see ya..
EA looks very promising.
I tried to make a system out of the synergy, but I never quite made it work.
I am thrilled that this Recovery system is being attempted for an EA, and am greatful to you guys for trying it. I hope you will bear with it, and give a shot at coding it. I don't know how hard it will be,
I think this will make a great recovery system and has the potential to make good EA's more reliable, and Great EAs Excellent.
I have used this recovery manually for the last year and a half, and have been successful, because, let's face it, as a manual trader . . . I am only mediocre, and sometimes I really SUCK. This has always worked out for me.
I ran a backtest on this puppy right off the bat. Looks like it has great potential. I like it. I tried to figure out a system with the sym bars some time back but couldn't make it work. Looks like Rob did a good one.
The sequencing for this recovery is not there. It is currently running something like a reverse martingale. I have whipped up a new PDF to try to demonstrate further.
I hope you guys will keep this in the EA and you will take the time and trouble to try coding this recovery. It beats a martingale by a mile for safety, but it is much slower.
Here's the rundown on the system and how it works. We'll concentrate on the SEQUENCE and forget about the math for the moment.
Like the martingale, it works in cycles. Also like the martingale, you have a BASE LOT that you choose. The cycle starts with the FIRST LOSER. After all, IF YOU HAVE A STRING OF WINNERS, YOU DO NOTHING. NEVER DICK AROUND WITH A GOOD THING.
NOW, LET'S SAY YOU HAVE A STRING OF LOSERS. IF YOU ARE LOSING, YOU ALWAYS KEEP TRADING AT YOUR BASE LOT. THIS REDUCES DRAWDOWN
I decided not to throw any math into this, and to only explain the sequence.
Okay, scenario:
YOU HAVE HAD 5 LOSSES IN A ROW AT 0.01 BASE LOT.
THE CYCLE STARTED WITH YOUR FIRST LOSS.
(REMEMBER, YOUR GOAL IS TO GET BACK TO BREAK EVEN PLUS SOME SORT OF PROFIT)
FINALLY . . . YOU HAVE A WINNER
NEXT TRADE WILL BE:
0.02 win GOAL BEEN REACHED? NO
NEXT TRADE :
0.03 win GOAL REACHED? NO
NEXT TRADE :
0.04 win GOAL REACHED? NO
NEXT TRADE :
0.05 win GOAL REACHED? NO
(now, this is IMPORTANT. let's say you are close to goal. rather than go to 0.06, you do the math and just trade enough reach the goal)
NEXT TRADE :
0.03 win GOAL REACHED, CYCLE DONE
OKAY, NOW YOU SAY,"BUT SHAKE, BABY! WHAT IF YOU DON'T WIN ALL THOSE IN A ROW!"
Good question, so let's throw some losses into the works.
Here again, you have a string of losses at base lot of 0.01. finally a win:
NEXT TRADE:
0.02 win Goal reached? no
NEXT TRADE:
0.03 win Goal reached? no
NEXT TRADE:
0.04 LOSS goal reached? of coarSe not
NEXT TRADE:
0.01 LOSS (NOTICE AFTER THE LOSS, WE WENT BACK TO BASE LOT 0.01}
NEXT TRADE: 0.01 win goal reached? no
NEXT TRADE:
0.05 win goal reached? no (NOTE WE RESUMED THE ESCALATION)
NEXT TRADE:
0.06 LOSS (WITH THIS LOSS, WE RETURN TO BASE LOT)
NEXT TRADE:
0.01 (ALWAYS RETURN TO BASE LOT AFTER LOSS)
NEXT TRADE: 0.01 win goal reached? no
NEXT TRADE:
0.07 win GETTING CLOSE (here again we do the math, and only trade
enough to pass the goal)
NEXT TRADE:
0.03 GOAL REACHED
I know that it all seems pretty long winded, and the example is pretty extreme, and a little absurd. When you plug in the math, you will see how it works. With a good system, you rarely get past the 3 or 4th levels. The DRAWDOWN IS NOT NEAR AS BIG AS A MARTINGALE TYPE.
since you don't double.
Please see the PDF. Note, on the PDF, I only used a 1:1 RR to make the math easier. With a real trade and account, the profits and losses varies, This, however, has never been too much of an issue. If the profit is tiny, I usually consider it as never happened and repeat it as if never happend.
I hope you get the gist, and will try to incorporate it. I have reaped much from all the guys here and on FF, and have always wanted a meaningful way to pay back a little.
Thanks again, mike and Rob
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
