Hi Brother  GG53,

I already answered your PM,  in case there’s trouble with the file download from PM, (since I experienced that previously)  I also post the mq4 file here..

also the screenshot example

GBPUSD H1, Using daily (1440)/default with GMT 0 server

GBPUSD H1, Using Daily/default with GMT 0 server, and London Open Price  (8 am)…[Read more]

I’m confused…

If the entry was based on higher TF – than looking at a higher TF is no change in “tactics”.

Same goes for MM & Risk.

But you suggested, or my understanding was, to CHANGE the initial entry logic to another logic, while in the tade- and my response was based on this “tactic”.

G.

On position sizing:

The main target of money management is on how to MAXIMIZE the geometric return in our account.

Using %Balance or %Equity is too simplistic and reduces your earning potential.

My favorites are the trade-size techniques introduced by the “Kelly Criterion” (either half or full Kelly) or the “Fixed Ratio concepts” by  Ryan Jo…[Read more]

On position sizing:

Using %Balance or %Equity is too simplistic and reduces your earning potential.

My favorites are the trade-size techniques introduced by the “Kelly Criterion” (either half or full Kelly) or the “Fixed Ratio concepts” by  Ryan Jones (Google it and watch the results).

It requires logging of previous trades results and calcu…[Read more]

On position sizing:

Using %Balance or %Equity is too simplistic and reduces your earning potential.

My favorites are the trade-size techniques introduced by the “Kelly Criterion” (either half or full Kelly) or the “Fixed Ratio concepts” by  Ryan Jones (Google it and watch the results).

It requires logging of previous trades results and calcu…[Read more]

I’m against this kind of “strategy”.

1. It is against your initial Entry logic, MM, and risk management – introducing “hope”, expectation and guess work.

2. It will keep you in the market for much longer – consuming margin, and exposing you to yet another market changes.

G.

I’m against this kind of “startegy”.

1. It is against your initial Entry logic, MM, and risk management – introducing “hope”, expectation and guess work.

2. It will keep you in the market for much longer – consuming margin, and exposing you to yet another market changes.

G.

My personal “strategy” for exit a trade with “no reason”:

If the trade is not in profit after 4 bars – I exit the trade.

Reason: My entry signal was probably false, Market or conditions might have changed.

Staying for longer than that is landing me in “La-La Land” and guess work, not trading per my entry logic anymore.

My Ego is bruised, but…[Read more]

My personal “strategy” for exit a trade with “no reason”:

If the trade is not in profit after 4 bars – I exit the trade.

Reason: My entry signal was probably false, Market or conditions might have changed.

Staying for longer than that is landing me in “La-La Land” and guess work, not logical trading anymore.

My Ego is bruised, but I’m out.

G.

#1 – Ok.

#2 – % of balance method is debatable… Consider losing 50% of your account, recovery will take ages because of smaller lots.

#3 – Ok.

#4 – Initial Stop by %ATR is Ok, adapting SL should reduce initial risk and not based on ATR. Maybe variation on PSAR or dynamic reduction of ATR factor.

#5 – BE should be based on risk factor (…[Read more]

#1 – Ok.

#2 – % of balance method is debatable… Consider losing 50% of your account, recovery will take ages because of smaller lots.

#3 – Ok.

#4 – Initial Stop by %ATR is Ok, adapting SL should reduce initial risk and not based on ATR. Maybe variation on PSAR or dynamic reduction of ATR factor.

#5 – BE should be based on risk factor (…[Read more]

#1 – Ok.

#2 – % of balance method is debatable… Consider losing 50% of your account, recovery will take ages because of smaller lots.

#3 – Ok.

#4 – Initial Stop by %ATR is Ok, adapting SL should reduce initial risk and not based on ATR. Maybe variation on PSAR or constant reduction of ATR factor.

#5 – BE should be based on risk factor…[Read more]

I see what you mean.

The “bug” in the logic is that your Entry logic is using different measurements for “Trend” and “Range” than the PT.

My trading style is built around “fixed” way of determinig “Trending” or “Ranging” market condition. It is always the same and depends on the entry TF (check 2 higher TF’s and 1 lower TF).

If you call this…[Read more]

Entry point decision was based on known data at that time. Why should I “synchronize” my trading on history instead of what is going on right now?

Doing so is like “let’s synchronize our watches to the time 4 hours ago”…

G.

“Open” and “Close” are terms borrowed from the Stock & Commodities markets, where there is a true “Open” of the day and true “Close” of the trading day.

In Forex there is no such thing, prices are in continues flow. Semi-true “Open” & “Close” only happen in Friday close and monday open – excluding interbank quotes during that time.

Since…[Read more]

Entry and my idea of trade management are two separate issues in my trading.

Entry is decided based upon current known market data. Now you decide to enter.

As time goes by, market is developing and changing – and at this point the “perfect trade manager” should adapt to changes – even if the trade is going “your way” or against it.

Leaving…[Read more]

Entry and my idea of trade management are two separate issues in my trading.

Entry is decided based upon current known market data. Now you decide to enter.

As time goes by, market is developing and changing – and at this point the “perfect trade manager” should adapt to changes – even if the trade is going “your way” or against it.

G.

Maybe a simple example will steer this discussion away from “random entries” strategy, and more to the point (just one example of “adaptive trade management”:

When you should exit a trade even before StopLoss is hit?

G.

Yes, but it’s an old one… I have an improved ones since than.

But we are in a “fair” or “true” price vs. current graph price discussion.

G.

Please re-read my posts.

I’m not talking about “random entries” system. I’m talking about dynamic, adaptive trade management that makes logical decisions on current active trade.

G.