Guns is Scott. Uses the same moronic terminology. His only defense is to provide the backtest and an out of sample backtest, which the felon won’t due bc it will be proven unprofitable. If this utter dogshit can be automated then there is no need to “teach” it. If this shit were profitable he would cover that shit like the actual Grail and not pawn it for $250. The guy is a cartoon and so is Laurent Numbnuts and his delta1 Fido CV.
I've been following the thread only loosely. I do not recall a "Guns" in the thread. But if these fuckers want to see what a 70% win rate looks like, there it is for them to see, in me, in action on the sim box, because that is all they are doing as well...Sim trading. Fake money is easy money. But damn I am so good at it. Good thing I am not trying to sucker in a whole bunch of gullible newts into my "system".
You just HAD to do that, didn't you. You know I cannot resist. It is edumacational. Zero Wing for the Sega Genesis. A good game, actually. And then the "meme" took off, for a while. This one is much more funner. Like a roomer.
@Ates, I am sorry you had a bad experience. I have had many in the trading game. I thought I would quickly jump in with my 2 cents. After having come across a lot of charlatans in the trading game I now really value educators who: - - share their results both good and bad. - have a system that is black and white so I can verify if the trade was valid or not. No smoke and mirrors with lines like "I never would have taken that trade because of x,y,z" when x,y and z are very discretionary and objective. - inform you of the good, the and, and the ugly - give you access to hundreds of trades not just a few cherry picked examples. Every system has good and bad patches and we need to see both Now I totally understand that you and Scott had a bad experience. I have been following scott's system over the last month and here are my findings. - I believe his system does have an edge. Now that doesn't mean trading a 2 min chart is easy and I am sure that it will take some time to trade it without mistakes. - His trade journaling is 2nd to none. This alone has made a huge difference to my performance. - I review his posted trades and they do meet the system rules. He owns up to mistakes (both winners and losers). - I am still only trading the mean reversion entries on EURUSD. So far it has been surprisingly good. I have taken 71 trades in the last month. I have recorded 61% success rate with a positive expectancy of 0.34. My biggest drawdown has been 4R. See my attachment for more in depth stats. - I have started looking at this exact same system using H8/D1/D2 on the major currencies. Just sticking to the mean reversion setups I have backtested AUDUSD and GBPUSD for 2019. So far 81% success rate. I personally feel that on the higher time frame the results are more trustworthy as there are a lot less "fat thumb" errors which come hand in hand with scalping. In summary, I don't believe there are any magic systems out there. The magic actually comes in fully documenting your system so you can have an accurate picture on what your system's strengths and weaknesses are. With this knowledge you can refine your system over time and learn to trust your system. Once you trust your system you can play the edge as much as possible whilst continuously reviewing to see if there is any divergence from your expected performance. I have personally enjoyed working with Scott and Daniel and I have learnt a lot. I feel that I have a long way to go but that I am on the right track.
Getting back on topic... Convict Scott released his latest newsletter, pretending like nothing ever happened and ignoring how badly his request backfired. Relevant screenshot: Personally I'm not much for the drug-addict and indicator bashing. There's already plenty of legitimate criticism regarding his business practices and how poorly he treats his paying students.