Page 4 of 505 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 92

Thread: Did martingale work for someone?

  1. #61
    2 Attachment(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Golludo
    Modification of the lot size: 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 ....
    With 1 2 4 8 16 32 martingale, you require just one win, following a shedding sequence, to reunite to break even( 1).

    With 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 martingale, you want two successive triumphs. That is the trade off.

    Quote Originally Posted by Golludo
    To actually utilize this approach safely....
    Practically, there's no means of utilizing this system safely, as you'll consistently strike losing sequences. The more you trade, the larger the longest dropping sequence will likely be.

    In The Event That you really have an edge, therefore you do not desire martingale, which signifies that you can trade with comparative security. Any losses are just made up over time.

    For instance, in case you shed (say) 7 occasions consecutively a T 1% per trade, you are down 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 = 7%. It'll demand around 7.5% increase to recuperate to break-even (why maybe not 7%? #8212; see https://forexintuitive.com/forex-tra...wiz-index.html. To recuperate from draw-down of N% necessitates an increase of (100 x N)/(100 #8211; N) %).

    In The Event you utilize fibo centered 'gale, after 7 straight losses, you are down 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 = 53%. Now it's going to demand should you choose to view it this way, a 113% increase to recuperate to 47 successive triumphs at 1 unit, or break even. Desiring 47 triumphs to recuperate from merely 7 losses is cash direction that is quite poor IMO. Or of course, you'll be able to risk a place size of 3 4 next time, and you are down 87%, from which there isn't any practical hope of retrieval if this trade is a reduction.

    So what's the chance of striking 7 successive losses? A 65% win rate a-T 1:1 r r affords a profit aspect of nearly 2.0, which, according to Paul Tudor Jones, if kept throughout a lengthy trading livelihood, is outstandingly great. Now, for those who own a win rate of 65% a-T 1:1 r r, the likelihood of 7 successive losses in any 500 trade sequence is is just about 27%. See fasteners. That is likely a lot greater than many folks believe.

    Martingale is for nickel and dime 'traders', in order that when they botch their account, losing is inconsequential. No severe expert uses martingale. To anybody who questions this, read Jack Schwager's Industry Wizards publications, or Ralph Vince's 'http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Mo.../dp/0471547387' on skilled cash management. The term martingale does not rate even a solitary reference in any of these novels.

    Quote Originally Posted by Golludo
    ..... one could have to utilize micro lots (0.01) on a 10,000 $ account and miniature lots (0.1) on a 100,000 $ account...you see how illogical that can be
    Request any controlled fund supervisor, who handles more than $10-million, how he dimensions his locations.

    http://www.jarrattdavis.com/about/ (whose expense organization is a portion of the IPM team, which handles gt; $250m) measurements consistently AT - 1% equity risk for every 100 pips, i.e. 1:1 leverage. That's just the same ratio as micros on minis on a $100k account, or a $10k account. Risk is managed by professional traders.

    (And to anybody who believes that can not create an acceptable yield, typically 30 pips per day x-20 trading times = 600 pips, or 6% yield, each month. Compounded that is approx 100% p.a. Examine that to the returns on-us Treasury bills!)

    https://forexintuitive.com/attachmen...1496015380.xls

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by eukzenio
    Compounding is the new martingale...
    New? A key?

    Informed traders have already been using set frac sizing to compound their gains since time immemorial. And with no requirement to work with any type of martingale.

  3. #63
    at some stage all methods require a person to step up and say 'no more!' all methods

    Dealers wish to locate a system which doesn't have doubt in it - an impossible job and also the leading component in shedding traders.

    The only real difference with systems will be the amount of risk - the more you raise the risk the larger the potential benefit.

    Martingale would operate if you had the capability to kill your losses in the stage the market determines this specific run is not going to come straight back - of course you CAn't quantify that with analysis - you cannot ever quantify what is going to occur next. Phrases like 'large probability' simply set a smoke screen within the entire uncertainty of it all.

    The ironic section of it all-is martingale is well-known because folks do not desire to shed but getting a reduction at some stage is the only factor that will make it operate

  4. #64
    I consider there are lessons we could learn in the failures of the martingale method

    1) averaging down is sort of trendy, but we don't have to to scale in as sharply as martingale.
    2) we can not only keep on hanging on to losing trades, at some stage we should reduce our losses
    3) inversely, we should not restrict our profits both.

    I believe sticking to the above mentioned rules you can tune something which lives the last 10 years of price information. Take on half just as much risk as also you ought to possess a fairly good chance of living the next 10 years of price information and what you are shown by that.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by JonanAltza
    Please explanation the morbid nature of this analogy, but I consider it's minded: Is a man who h-AS formerly pushed a vehicle for 10 years lacking any injury more likely to perish in a car accident, than one who h AS been driving for twenty years with no accident?
    I comprehend the level you're attempting to make, but the world is we are not offered a selection of just two strategies. We need a approach to determine which one to select, or inversely, which kinds to remove and have a selection of strategies that are endless.

    Quote Originally Posted by JonanAltza
    Even if no #8216;black swan#8217; h AS happened in twenty years#8217; worth of info, there#8217;s no method of computing mathematically whether it#8217;s more prone to occur tomorrow, or whether you#8217;r e mo Re prone to to flee wreck for many years. Historical testing becomes meaningless.
    Doesn't your stage apply to any or all strategies and not simply martingale?

    I firmly disagree that historic screening is pointless. I believe it is in identifying which strategies you shouldn't run, very purposeful. If I need to pick between two strategies:
    - one that labored for 10 years that mathematically h AS an incredibly little but particular opportunity it is going to burst; or
    - one that functions well for only 5 from the last 10 years
    ... tell me why I I will pick the latter?

    All strategies are flawed from the start as we're instantly a T a reduction on account of commissions and spreads. In the finest case circumstance we'd have spreads or no commissions and we'd nonetheless just have a 50/50 opportunity of winning. The title of the sport would be to locate the edge that is elusive. Your chances magically become better than 50/50 and, when located and though still toss millions of dollars involved with it it. this is mathematically difficult individuals (Hannover, with admiration, you're the expert here therefore please appropriate me easily incorrect).

    I presume if we are eager to discount the math when we consider we've located an edge, then you certainly may do the same in regards to martingale so long as you're ready (emotionally and fiscally!) for what might come.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by murcianbeauty
    The only huge difference with methods are the amount of risk - the more you raise the risk the better the possible reward.
    That#8217;s accurate, but with martingale you#8217;r e raising risk, and exponentially thus, just to regain to breakeven.

    Quote Originally Posted by darwinelcrack
    2) we can not only keep on hanging on to losing trades, at some stage we should minimize our losses
    Quote Originally Posted by murcianbeauty
    Martingale would function if you had the skill to eliminate your losses at the stage the market determines this specific run will perhaps not come back
    Concurred, but the trader who has sized at 1 1 1 1 1...... will consistently have an inferior reduction to cure, than the trader who h AS sized a T 1 2 4 8 16...... (or 1 2 3 5 8...... or whatever progressive staking is utilized). The trader who used martingale h AS an unnecessarily big loss to recuperate from.

    Having stated that, the sarcasm with martingale is the fact that, after losses have gotten considerable, getting #8220;merely that one more measure#8221; may possibly offer the only real realistic possibility of retrieval; but additionally, it immerses the trader exponentially deeper in to draw down, if the following trade is a reduction. It is a no win scenario.

    showthread.php?p=7947156#post7947156 Disliked I believe sticking to the above mentioned rules you can tune something which lives the last 10 years of price information. Take on half just as much risk as also you ought to possess a fairly good chance of living the next 10 years of price information and what you are shown by that. This is defied by discounted Martingale. The mo-Re infrequent the occasion, the bigger the information sample in order to achieve a statistically significant result, necessitated for the testing. In the instance of martingale, if the odds of getting successive losses that are enough to trigger wreck is infinitesimally tiny, then the information sample should be infinitely big the error becomes prohibitive.

    Please justify the morbid nature of the analogy, but I consider it really is minded: Is someone that has formerly pushed a vehicle for 10 years lacking any injury more inclined to perish in a vehicle crash, than one who is driving for twenty years without a collision? That#8217;s comparable to the issue of backtesting a martingale. Even though no #8216;black swan#8217; h AS happened in twenty years#8217; worth of info, there#8217;s no method of computing mathematically whether it#8217;s more prone to occur tomorrow, or whether you#8217;r e mo Re prone to to flee wreck for many years. Historical screening becomes pointless.

    showthread.php?p=7947173#post7947173 Disliked Dealers desire to locate a system which doesn't have doubt in it - an impossible job and also the leading component in shedding traders. ...... The section of it all-is martingale is well-known because folks do not desire to lose Discounted Concurred. Same- retrieval, pair hedging trading, contributing to losses, martingale #8212; these are all born out from the human want in order to avoid departing at a reduction.


    Al As, I cannot locate just one positive factor to martingale. It really is just the worst possible sort of MM.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by darwinelcrack
    I ardently disagree that historic screening is meaningless.
    I do not consider that all historic screening is pointless. Nonetheless, analyzing for the probability of a' swan' occasion would need a huge quantity of historic info, because of the rarity of the function.

    I am certain you are conscious of the manner martingale works: it ensures retrieval until one surprisingly long losing series abruptly causes wreck (https://forexintuitive.com/forex-tra...n-trading.html is an illustration: notice how a account balance increases consistently until the machine abruptly implodes). Given that such a dropping sequence (for instance, 10 successive losses) is a really infrequent occasion #8212; in the illustration, it took over 5 5,000 trades before it occurred #8212; utilizing historic info to attempt to ascertain how probably it'll happen earlier, rather than afterwards, is shut to useless, due to the large statistical error.

    Offered that price motion is near to arbitrary (50/50), if a trader trades for long enough afterward, a T least theoretically, he'll eventually strike every feasible price pattern, including the one that causes the 'departure sequence'. It may happen to morrow, or it may occur in a point past the conclusion of the trader's life, in which situation his martingale is (fortuitously) a resounding achievement. But my purpose is you have no way of understanding, and no manner of screening, if it is less, or mo Re, probably to happen. It is like enjoying Russian roulette #8212; you do not understand which chamber h AS the bullet, but you will fundamentally strike it, if you pull the gun trigger regularly enough.

    In my estimation, that's quite poor risk management.


    Easily need to pick between two strategies:
    - one that labored for 10 years that mathematically h AS an incredibly little but particular opportunity it is going to burst; or
    - one that functions well for only 5 from the last 10 years
    ... tell me why I I will pick the latter?

    A fascinating predicament. I believe Van Tharp once submit a comparable issue, some thing like: would you instead (1) drop a certain $5,000, or (2) have A1% probability of dropping $200,000, and a-99% probability of losing nothing. Mathematically, the 2nd alternative is better (on common, you'll lose $2,000). Nevertheless, individuals ensure their houses, and also other advantages that are valuable. That implies to me that folks would rather possess a bonded modest loss (spending the insurance insurance fees) than have a little risk of a dropping every thing.

    Nevertheless, in your circumstance, that you don't say how much richesse I've in the account, and that would probably determine my pick. In case the account dimensions was insignificant, e.g. $500 that I could readily manage to drop, then I Would operate with your first strategy, in the hope that it'd spend off huge without bursting.

    Yet, if the account size was substantial, e.g. 50% of my internet prosperity, and I was pushed to pick one of the two strategies, then I Would operate with the second strategy, and take a modest loss, if required. But easily had been enabled to select neither strategy, then that is what I Would do.


    I presume if we are eager to discount the math when we consider we've located an edge, then you certainly may do the same in regards to martingale so long as you're ready (emotionally and fiscally!) for what might come.

    I respectfully differ. In the event you have discovered an advantage, why don't you trade the way the experts do, i.e. shield your funds with conservative MILLIMETER, to give the border the maximum potential chance to win over the extended phrase? Losses will likely be recouped as an issue of course in case the edge is solid. Martingale, with its 'departure sequence', is a risk that is completely unnecessary. That is why n-one of the professionals use it to say the clear.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by JonanAltza
    If you've discovered an advantage, why don't you trade how the professionals do
    That issue answers it self, plus everything you indicate here...

    Quote Originally Posted by Estimate
    To say the clear, that is why n-one of the experts use it
    Lol, the Industrial Plant never shifts. Still battling the (great?) fight.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by
    Hope somebody might be alive to reply this question.
    I'm repeating my solution after all these years.

    Will rekindle yet another time in 2018.

    Did we nevertheless locate someone still living martingaling forex?

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmut22
    quote I'm repeating my solution after all these years. Will rekindle yet another time. Did we nevertheless locate someone still living martingaling forex?
    I'm presently utilizing the Martingale lot sizing in my own trades successfully. And I use first martingale (BUY, SELL, PURCHASE, SELL...) strategy. The essential concept of my strategy will be to open a place if and only when the candle breaks out a degree (shuts on the different side of a goal amount). So, with regards to the space between the prior place's open price and that of the current location, I compute the correct lot dimension (maybe not required a multiple of 2). In case the amount of trades becomes 3, I see the internet profit to become zero (break even) or more to shut the trades. In case the amount of trades becomes 4 I see the internet profit and right as it hits my (digital) SL goal, I shut all of the trades. Another level is the fact that, I spend low and high levels to the breakout of session. A EA has been written by me based on this particular strategy. It did well for me personally.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by khamik
    Lol, the Industrial Plant never shifts. Still battling the (good?) fight.
    Yes, still here. I feel bored or stressed, it prompts me to to publish, even supposing it's on the exact same themes that are old. Do not understand why.

    Great to realize which you're still about. Compliments to you personally, my buddy of the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Helmut22
    quote I'm repeating my reply after all these years. Will rekindle yet another time. Did we nevertheless find someone still living martingaling forex?
    Helmut22,

    Forexhard uses (a capped) martingale with his https://forexintuitive.com/forex-tra...apitulate.html, and as far as I am aware, he is nevertheless living, plus among the very most successful traders on FF.

    While a capped martingale can work, and deliver consistent yields while it does s O, it is nevertheless also insecure for my individual liking. The text book strategy (assemble an entry/ex IT strategy around a directional or behavioral prejudice in price motion; and size in a consistent 1%#8211;2% risk per location) however makes the top sense if you ask me.

    Compliments of the the growing season to you personally, also.

    David

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by JonanAltza
    quote , Forexhard uses (a capped) martingale with his https://forexintuitive.com/forex-tra...pean-open.html, and as far as I am aware, he is nevertheless living, plus among the very most successful traders on FF. While a martingale that is capped can work, and deliver yields that are consistent while it does s O, it is nevertheless also insecure for my individual liking. The text book strategy (assemble an entry/ex IT strategy around a directional or behavioral prejudice in price motion; and size in a consistent 1%#8211;2% risk per location) nonetheless makes the top sense if you ask me. Compliments...
    Thanks JonanAltza, I really don't understand how you seek out out what's important from these multitudinous threads.
    Will see the depth in this pulled thread after. I believed until 2007 in martingale, it usually labored on $Us/JPY, even in these instances when there have been no graphs connected to trading platforms/display whatever, consistently, for me. In 2008, I dropped my account striving to martingale that 700 pip down euro/67146 transfer. If it doesn't really happen in the life of a trader it again comes home to its great, but the anxiety is definitely there and this panic never allows me obtain huge. Some martingales also attempted, but perhaps not quite seriously. Possibly I verify it one mo Re time and return.

    Thanks and Content Vacations.

  13. #73
    How did you've a greatest trade of 1159.8 pips when you're utilizing A50 pip grid? (Notice typical win/loss/expectancy).

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by JonanAltza
    .... The text book strategy (assemble an entry/ex IT strategy around a directional or behavioral prejudice in price motion; and size in a steady 1%–2% risk per location) nonetheless makes the top sense to me.....
    That's overly boring though, there is no clear challenge within it. Luckily for people who desire losers to feed the market, most traders here are much too clever to trade like that

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by darwinelcrack
    How did you have a greatest trade of 1159.8 pips
    oh, because you discovered that... I had been truly in a broker (IBFX) competition (who gets the most pips in one single location in a week), and that I let one among my GBPNZD place ran free (with profit) and won the competition for the week.

    Quote Originally Posted by darwinelcrack
    when you're employing a 50 pip grid? (Notice typical win/loss/expectancy).
    Naw... exit strategy has consistently been letting the victor run just as much as it does, and schism exists.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by TaniaTania26
    quote Hel-Lo, are you still trading martingale design ?
    hi, no I've previously answered it is not some thing for the long-terms.
    https://forexintuitive.com/forex-tra...tion_demo.html

    Thanks.

  17. #77
    1 Attachment(s) Most Martingale traders have reduced chances in their own result to begin with. In this scenario, when you strike a string of shedding streak to burn off throughout your own pocket it is guaranteed to fail.

    If when likelihood is large enough, Martingale would operate nicely.
    Under was my outcome in Martingale Power System before although several expense bank portfolio supervisors did not enjoy me using the Martingale strategy by its feature and you-can't actually define a set risk % to your account when you're in bad-luck scenario of having dropping streaks one after one.

    There are plenty post online clarifies what chance you'll have to be regularly profit in Martingale. Look it up.

    should you be about the trail of wanting to get recruited by any FX trust banks, Martingale IS JUST NOT favored.

  18. #78
    martingale operates well before the market begins to go way off in another direction, then you definitely simply wind up getting margincalled,
    the outcome is allways the same..

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by felipe_dj
    Most Martingale traders have reduced chances in their own result to begin with. In this scenario, when you strike a string of shedding streak to burn off throughout your own pocket it is guaranteed to fail. Martingale would operate nicely if when likelihood is large enough. Below was my outcome in Martingale Power System before although several expense bank portfolio supervisors did not enjoy me using the Martingale strategy by its feature and you-can't actually define a set risk % to your account when you're in bad-luck scenario of having dropping streaks one after...
    Hello, are you still trading martingale design ?

  20. #80
    showthread.php?p=4726799#post4726799 Disliked Martingale needs to do with doubling the stake size after every loss, not producing a grid. The 2 are mutually unique. Discounted strike the nail on the the top

Tags for this Thread

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 more information