haha Despite the fact that I picked a picture where the strategy obviously profited, I'm making a legitimate point.
Actually, if you read my "rules" for the strategy, entry is made when the pullback is within 5 tics of the average at close. That rules out the first 2 times you see entry points. Say we scratch the 5 tic rule and just stick to the part where we enter at the end of the day... 2 profits and 1 small loss. I know its fun to try to debunk a strategy but the stats I worked out in excel say otherwise.
Why are you people killing what was an interesting thread by responding to and talking about Hershey? All you accomplish is looking as ridiculous as him.
Au contraire, Whisky opened the door on his thread ... after that, it was all downhill. Whatever, have fun.
You will have to prove to yourself and others that your suggestions bring in at least 1 tic per day on average extra profit over the original method rules.
Chaotically improving amidst a lot of noise. I like chaos. It brings out a LOT of fools, liars, and suckers. It also brings out the talented. See Mike's posts.
Mike: Let's try to push this improvement of yours a little further. Please consider: 1-Using a symmetrical method that would take the exactly opposite position on entry than your method, and exit SOMEWHERE else in time. This would cut risk substantially and also cut comms and slip for the entry. 2-An exponential compounder/sizer for your suggestion as is. Ignore comms and slippage for now, just to get pumped up. See if you can come up with any of the above 2 considerations (or both) in any order, and draw an equity curve with and without the improvements, for record purposes. Only do this if you really want to.
Thorp made a lot of money with this roulette approach, and a similar one applied to blackjack, before going to Wall Street to make even more millions. The payouts have not changed much, except for blackjack.