 |
ocean5
Registered: Feb 2012
Posts: 934 |
07-26-12 10:26 PM
Quote from athlonmank8:
Care to disprove him?
it is like to be an astronaut and teach folks to travel interstellar via internet.same sh1t.
take perfect entries,son!i`m a guru now!
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
dom993
Registered: Jul 2008
Posts: 537 |
07-26-12 10:36 PM
Quote from masterm1ne:
I have been trying to figure out a way to exit a trade the best point.
The best exit point is the one that maximizes your system long-term expectancy ... it cannot be optimum for any particular trade, and in the spirit of Mike Douglas "Trading in the zone" you shouldn't care about the current (or next) trade outcome, as long as you follow your system's rules.
On the market & timeframe I trade (CL intraday), I have found that moving the stop slightly above the last LH (for a short, as in your example) is what statistically works best - but I do wait for a LL before moving the stop (or when the trend is "old" enough, I do that upon a DB or near-miss of that), so back to your example I would be stopped on the 2nd green line, never on the 3rd one since price didn't come close enough to a DB.
I have in addition 2 other trailing stop mechanisms ... one is time-based (not from the entry, from the current trend-end), one is price-based (using a retracement level on the last leg when it exceeds a set size).
I actually have a target for my runner, but it only comes to play for about 5% of the trades - again, that target was decided based on statistics.
And for Jack - yes, I sometimes reverse the position, when I get an opposite side signal - but this is actually pretty rare for my system.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
logic_man
Registered: Oct 2010
Posts: 1489 |
07-26-12 11:01 PM
Quote from athlonmank8:
Care to disprove him?
If Hershey would provide actual data from his trades, rather than continually spew logorrhea about either his methodology's greatness or how great the unseen trade data is, it would be easy to disprove him empirically.
As it is, we are stuck without the means to disprove him other than plain common sense, based on the fact that his claims of making "3-6X the daily range" lead to numbers so big, so fast that it would take anyone all the time in the day to figure out what to do with the money, leaving no time for posting on ET.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
athlonmank8
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 3021 |
07-27-12 06:56 AM
Quote from logic_man:
If Hershey would provide actual data from his trades, rather than continually spew logorrhea about either his methodology's greatness or how great the unseen trade data is, it would be easy to disprove him empirically.
As it is, we are stuck without the means to disprove him other than plain common sense, based on the fact that his claims of making "3-6X the daily range" lead to numbers so big, so fast that it would take anyone all the time in the day to figure out what to do with the money, leaving no time for posting on ET.
'always in' is not some imaginary idea. I don't think you can use Jack's previous incoherent babble as a way to discredit a statement such as that.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
logic_man
Registered: Oct 2010
Posts: 1489 |
07-27-12 12:07 PM
Quote from athlonmank8:
'always in' is not some imaginary idea. I don't think you can use Jack's previous incoherent babble as a way to discredit a statement such as that.
I don't disagree that "always in" is a viable approach, I just disbelieve, strongly, that it can earn anyone 3-6X the daily range. At that point, a trader would be so far beyond what anyone else earns that it would be fair to say that trader was not of the same species as other traders. It would be like comparing a man to an amoeba.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
masterm1ne
Registered: Dec 2009
Posts: 797 |
07-27-12 02:19 PM
Quote from dom993:
The best exit point is the one that maximizes your system long-term expectancy ... it cannot be optimum for any particular trade, and in the spirit of Mike Douglas "Trading in the zone" you shouldn't care about the current (or next) trade outcome, as long as you follow your system's rules.
On the market & timeframe I trade (CL intraday), I have found that moving the stop slightly above the last LH (for a short, as in your example) is what statistically works best - but I do wait for a LL before moving the stop (or when the trend is "old" enough, I do that upon a DB or near-miss of that), so back to your example I would be stopped on the 2nd green line, never on the 3rd one since price didn't come close enough to a DB.
I have in addition 2 other trailing stop mechanisms ... one is time-based (not from the entry, from the current trend-end), one is price-based (using a retracement level on the last leg when it exceeds a set size).
I actually have a target for my runner, but it only comes to play for about 5% of the trades - again, that target was decided based on statistics.
And for Jack - yes, I sometimes reverse the position, when I get an opposite side signal - but this is actually pretty rare for my system.
The only thing I don't understand is why you wouldn't want to take a trade off if you witnessed the third peak (in the example). The demonstratrion of a higher low, and then a break of the previous peak would demonstrate the markets desire to rise wouldn't it? It sounds like your stats show (at least for Crude) that you shouldn't lower your stop till you have a lower low. The strategy I'm working on works best for ES/NQ and esp TF.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
| Receive
an email whenever a new post is added to this thread by subscribing
to it. |
|
|
|
|
