This topic has been reported for inappropriate content
- This topic has 293 replies, 47 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
FPTZs or MPTZs or both ?
Can you clarify what the F and M stand for?
I’m guessing Failed Potential Transient Zone? There is no such thing.. this is simply a Recurrent Zone. There are no failed zones. It’s either a recurrent zone or a transient zone. A potential zone is one that can be either transient or recurrent and we won’t know that until H time has passed.And I assume M means mid.. again there is no such thing since there are only 2 types of zones, transient or recurrent. It can be anywhere, mid/top/bottom, you name it. Where ever price exists on the right side => its is transient, where ever it doesn’t => it’s recurrent. Keep it simple, no need to complicate this with all kinds of names and classifications.
Focus, Patience, Determination & Order in chaos
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
usd/gbp If this 2nd mid TZ breaks up look for 156.50 + as kiads star on bottom TZ using mid TZ as 50% of move GL all
I AM That I AM
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
FPTZs or MPTZs or both ? Can you clarify what the F and M stand for? I’m guessing Failed Potential Transient Zone? There is no such thing.. this is simply a Recurrent Zone. There are no failed zones. It’s either a recurrent zone or a transient zone. A potential zone is one that can be either transient or recurrent and we won’t know that until H time has passed. And I assume M means mid.. again there is no such thing since there are only 2 types of zones, transient or recurrent. It can be anywhere, mid/top/bottom, you name it. Where ever price exists on the right side => its is transient, where ever it doesn’t => it’s recurrent. Keep it simple, no need to complicate this with all kinds of names and classifications.
Hi Saver0,
FPTZ = Fractal (top/bottom), MPTZ = Mid one. OK, it can be at both Fractal and Mid TZ. Could you please explain this: “Where ever price exists on the right side => its is transient, where ever it doesn’t => it’s recurrent”.
Thanks
Edit: or do you mean that if price exists on right side => it is recurrent?
Copied from my post of FF
So
The problem I see with the indicators created to see transient zones is that they include the wick . If an adjustment can be made such that the left side of the zone depends on the bar’s close we can capture the zones that are based on the left H breakout bar.
To capture zones based on a constant price we can select or own constant pip value.
so basically a counter breakout strategy.
It may be valuable to look at the SSBO system to gauge recurrence probability for breaks from consolidation zones (CZs) and use the the prerequisite of a CZ prior to the creation of the PTZ as a filter.
Agree disagree on zones based on close vs high/low? why?
Another thought is that a zone on a lower time frame may be present on one broker vs the other creating a dissimilar wormhole….
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Interesting take and completely valid to argue.. I see the original idea being presented as theory rather than instruction so you can add additional components as necessary. Getting rid of the wicks has been discussed, however I think the problem that remains are the MTZs or middle transient zones. These are the areas with no wick that can still fail, and often times greatly because they come about via news events and price is very one-dimensional. Thoughts on counter-acting losing in these zones?
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Any area can fail (have HUGE draw down)
Same as in any system this must be managed in your trade plan…
The thing I would be concerned with is having correct data in my testing and tuning the theory. What changes in probability are seen by removing wicks? Can we actually capture potential transient prices with the current tools used? Doubt it.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
If you doubt it then what’s the point of the post?
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
I received the input I desired in PMs yesterday from those who got my point.
Thanks guys
The point was to get input on the thoughts I expressed to adjust the indicators for TZ.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
From my FF post yestarday
Quoting Innate
{quote} I tried to understand what you are proposing but got lost. To me TZ’s must include the wick as TZ’s only deal with price, they have no reference to the close value of a bar. Just because I dont get it doesnt mean you dont have a good idea. Hopefully you will be able to develop into something. Best of luck.
This is because we use the candles as a tool to organize price. Segment it.
That’s why the lowest time frame gives the best opportunity for “seeing” if price has only printed once after the breakout of the left H bars which frame H recurrent prices. Unless a different indicator is made that is not based on bars we have to use the tool at hand (the 1 min bar) even though this to is inaccurate. How is a wick formed? Price reach a high/low and retrace (become Recurrent) before the close. That is why it’s clear to me prices in the wick cannot be used. The possible H transient price or prices must have only printed once.
That why I said Box breakout system (SSBO) would be another good match because the box of Consolidated prices (Recurrent prices) is framed. The first pip that breaks out is a candidate as a H transient pip (price)
it is very unlikely to have large 5 pip zones unless a thrust of some sort has occurred like during news and such causing a quick burst of printed prices in one direction with NO retrace giving us time to jump in and ride the retrace back to clear those once possible rare (transient) prices . Not previous h transient zones, but the current one building.
Remember the Wormhole thread where the EA searched for a stochastic mismatch and if found that would be deemed a “wormhole” and after price deviated enough a trade towards clearing the problem was made. Same idea with TZ. It may just be a single price that is a possible H transient price. So this price is marked on a chart as a problem with x probability of being cleared before Right H completes. http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=511581
In fact the left H could be replaced by many things but bars may be the best for calculating probability statistics.
Previous day breaks
S/R breaks
News
ETC…
We just need a better “watcher” of price action after the break. A better watcher even than the 1 min time frame.
The PTZ is found between the breakout and the close in my thinking. That is if we are using the bar the capture it…
Understand?
A 1 pip Renko chart was suggested to see recurrent prices better. Sounds good!
Ok so the 97% recurrent theory is for price overall.
Does it even matter unless we are at overall price extremes? Thinking out loud…
H recurrent statistic indy works if it’s based on price not bars, or more rather bars and price are separated. Bars for time statistic and price for recurrent probability with the H parameters chosen. Being That wicks are not included in this indy, I feel it a flaw since I consider wicks clearly recurrent prices. Much respect for Kprsa and his work. I’d love for thoughts from him.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Hi,
almost 1 year trading on a paper account following FX-Jay’s style (never disclosed the strategy with me of course) – image attached.
Obviously MT4 has the big issue on the real drawdown calculation, but what I think is that the trading style is
risky because truly you have the majority of trades closing positively but when you have the looser one… it’s pain, real pain for the account
the real drawdown in last year was around 90%, so not sustainable
I suppose this is the reason why FX-Jay tried to continued to look for a new trading style, because he was lucky enought to tranform 10k in 400k in less than 3 months but he has seen what I have seen…
Thank you for your comments and opinion
D.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Hi, almost 1 year trading on a paper account following FX-Jay’s style (never disclosed the strategy with me of course) – image attached. Obviously MT4 has the big issue on the real drawdown calculation, but what I think is that the trading style is risky because truly you have the majority of trades closing positively but when you have the looser one… it’s pain, real pain for the account the real drawdown in last year was around 90%, so not sustainable I suppose this is the reason why FX-Jay tried to continued to look for a new trading style, because he was lucky enought to tranform 10k in 400k in less than 3 months but he has seen what I have seen… Thank you for your comments and opinion D.
Impressive! Both in the result and in the time duration. Care to share any of your thoughts on anything you learned? You say that it is unsustainable, but did you or do you (to some extent) think that this type of strategy may have a true edge? I say this because I know of a few traders who trade *kind of* like this, where they incur high “live DD” (aka closing the current losing trade would result in say 15, 20, 30%+ loss) but relatively small “true DD” (drawdown in equity graph). From the info I’ve garnered from these traders, they use no SL, they add on (sometimes in greater size) to the losing position (how many rules do they break here??) BUT at the end of the day they are profitable. I would think that trading an entire YEAR is quite a stress test of how well the system can perform, depending on the time frame. It also has made me wonder if trading at the retail level is really like a top tier performance skill, where the winners win big, and do so via the seemingly slimmest of margins. If one can take 10k and make 400 (40x) it seems well worth it to continue with account money management, like trading 2 5k accounts and letting a margin call take the trader out flat, rather than using a single 10k account and lowering risk.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Impressive! Both in the result and in the time duration. Care to share any of your thoughts on anything you learned? You say that it is unsustainable, but did you or do you (to some extent) think that this type of strategy may have a true edge? I say this because I know of a few traders who trade *kind of* like this, where they incur high “live DD” (aka closing the current losing trade would result in say 15, 20, 30%+ loss) but relatively small “true DD” (drawdown in equity graph). From the info I’ve garnered from these traders, they use no SL, they add on (sometimes in greater size) to the losing position (how many rules do they break here??) BUT at the end of the day they are profitable. I would think that trading an entire YEAR is quite a stress test of how well the system can perform, depending on the time frame. It also has made me wonder if trading at the retail level is really like a top tier performance skill, where the winners win big, and do so via the seemingly slimmest of margins. If one can take 10k and make 400 (40x) it seems well worth it to continue with account money management, like trading 2 5k accounts and letting a margin call take the trader out flat, rather than using a single 10k account and lowering risk.Hi CSendo,
I did the same you have explained, loosing trades with high drawdowns adding positions to the loosing ones, stressfull but results are there. In a paper account is very easy, in a real account you think twice.
I really don’t know if this strategy with some money management adjustment could become “more human”, on a side I see potentially a strong pattern (as you can see there were 3 phases: the yellow one where I applied the model to 4h EURUSD, the orange with the 5m EURUSD and the red with the definitive 15m. They are “smoother” depending on the number of trades and the average profit/loss) on the other side I see that there are not other ways to trade it if not loosing big money in some trade. If you remember FX-Jay had a lower drawdown (on closed trades) and he declared a drawdown around 35% on opened trades, for sure adopting different money mngt rules (I don’t have any, so no stop loss, nothing).
The frequency of bad trades is low enought to consider the idea of splitting into different 5 accounts the inizial capital. On the other side I was working only with bad trades as a new strategy (using them as a target for a potential new model), but this is a work in progress that is not satisfying me.
My first temptative was to analyze bigger time frames and going on shorter looking for the same main direction trades, I will check it further and provide you a feedback.
Thank you for your reply and for patience with my english
D.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Okay, seems to be in line with what I thought. Interesting to know that the equity curve is the result of multiple time frames! Are you just using the same strategy that was reviewed in the thread? (Waiting for a completed TZ first, and trading the second one) I’ll be interested to know how the rest of your strategy plays out! I’m tempted to try this out myself, I expect there’s a lot to learn from it.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Okay, seems to be in line with what I thought. Interesting to know that the equity curve is the result of multiple time frames! Are you just using the same strategy that was reviewed in the thread? (Waiting for a completed TZ first, and trading the second one) I’ll be interested to know how the rest of your strategy plays out! I’m tempted to try this out myself, I expect there’s a lot to learn from it.
Hi CSendo,
I spent 8 months to nail fully the FX-Jay base-model, checking all trades he did, charts and messages. In the end he was honestly sharing practically everything, and there was nothing else than the interpretation around TZ. There are a lot of different interpretations (I found at least 5) so his suggestion to follow our own way to research was correct. Our fantasy will help us.
I can suggest something, but I would like to exchange different point of views, use your imagination to “extract” what you see from charts.
I will continue to look for a key in this, potentially I’ve never seen a so high probability pattern (including the big drawdowns).
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Okay, seems to be in line with what I thought. Interesting to know that the equity curve is the result of multiple time frames! Are you just using the same strategy that was reviewed in the thread? (Waiting for a completed TZ first, and trading the second one) I’ll be interested to know how the rest of your strategy plays out! I’m tempted to try this out myself, I expect there’s a lot to learn from it.
Hi CSendo, I spent 8 months to nail fully the FX-Jay base-model, checking all trades he did, charts and messages. In the end he was honestly sharing practically everything, and there was nothing else than the interpretation around TZ. There are a lot of different interpretations (I found at least 5) so his suggestion to follow our own way to research was correct. Our fantasy will help us. I can suggest something, but I would like to exchange different point of views, use your imagination to “extract” what you see from charts. I will continue to look for a key in this, potentially I’ve never seen a so high probability pattern (including the big drawdowns).
Your dedication is inspiring sir. I was fairly unsuccessful in implementing the strategy that was revealed in the thread (IIRC, it was a while ago haha) and I instead worked on a variation of it on my own; not using the TZs directly but modeling price based around them. Perhaps it’s worth taking a closer look at again :)
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Your dedication is inspiring sir. I was fairly unsuccessful in implementing the strategy that was revealed in the thread (IIRC, it was a while ago haha) and I instead worked on a variation of it on my own; not using the TZs directly but modeling price based around them. Perhaps it’s worth taking a closer look at again :)
Observation is a complex process activating the most efficient neural network that we have :) our brain.
I want to share with you one of the other interpretations, when the 1st December 2015 was evidencing something “below” in the SP500 (all levels were touched later).
I suggest again to play and play with TZ
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Run a plan that withdraws profits weekly or after a % of growth and you can possibly make that work. You risk is what you put into the account, not a stop loss level. Risk the whole account. Grid systems as such need risk structured this way to benefit. How many 90% DD did you see?
Also not TZ as I see it. More like S/R and fractal recurrence. Which is great given you have the probability calculations on a significant amount of clean historic data.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Run a plan that withdraws profits weekly or after a % of growth and you can possibly make that work. You risk is what you put into the account, not a stop loss level. Risk the whole account. Grid systems as such need risk structured this way to benefit. How many 90% DD did you see? Also not TZ as I see it. More like S/R and fractal recurrence. Which is great given you have the probability calculations on a significant amount of clean historic data.
Thank you Billyon, withdrawing profits as well as splitting the account in 3 or 4 subaccounts as CSendo suggested. Probabilistic approach is the key for a successfull performance, only if combined with money management.
I was too concentrated in the first part forgetting the second one, but I remember that FX-Jay was applying both.
I would like to share the experience with a bad drawdown: in October I was short in AUDUSD with a target around 0.7020 and the market riding. I did the trade also in a real account with a very small size of 0.01 lots. After a couple of weeks I was completely pissed off and closed the trade with a loss. In November the AUDUSD bottomed out exactly around 0.7020. These “high probability levels” are very frequent, but I didn’t found a way to understand “when” they will re-occur. Considering that TZ are including the variable “time” something should be studied.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
And I don’t mean risk all your money. Take you risk percent and fund the account with that. Keep taking profit at 50% return or such until account blows. Rinse repeat
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
yes, that’s from the loss management. Even though there were 2 losses, the overall trade ended up in a profit. That was from 2 rare events happening one after the other. There is still a LOT of work to be done before this can have any use….
Thank you so much for relaying those answers LearnAlways! From this response, I can say what FX-Jay is doing makes perfect sense. To restate what you stated, he is trading: 1) Towards the trend. 2) Towards a PTZ once a TZ is formed. Now ask yourself why would this very simple method work? We know that a TZ gets formed when a certain time interval (H) has expired. This means the “retracement” is complete. …
These are interesting information saver0 … But trading by targeting RZ area as a reversal / pullback method is common in trading, and it is also well known that this reversal idea can be dangerous if we do not get the Right entry point, the draw down we get can be very very Big .. And as Eurusdd always said, we must choose the Right H value to get best result using transient / recurrent zone. Some times we must be very patient too, waiting our target to be hit (this because of the H value we choose). Although the win probability we can get is Big enough using this setting, the very large draw down can blow up our account, so the entry timing is very important here. If we use momentum indicator (instead of using repainting ZZ and its derivative versions) at lower TF (for example: @M1 ) , is it not too late for our entry ? Do you have statistic on this setup : how big is the draw down if we trade without SL, and is it a good idea to take all signal we can get using this setup ? Do you trade other instrument beside Forex (ex: stocks), and can this transient zone / recurrence zone idea be applied to stocks ?? Any clue / idea / advice / tools to avoid this draw down is really appreciated … Gracias !
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.