Actually, I believe 4 data points is fine. I don't have a degree in maths though. You told us 93%. My question is what are the odds of getting 3 losers in a row with a 93% hit rate. If I were computing a 93% hit rate then of course one would need many data points to make it reliable. If my question isn't clear then maybe someone else can re-phrase it in a different way? I think it has been answered anyway....
Your right. Im embarresd!! I didnt quite pick up on that until after the fact. Im a little slooooooow.
dude, although there is only a ~0.03% chance of you having 3 losers in a row, it COULD happen even if your method is profitable. so i'm not saying there is a 0% chance you know how to trade. what i AM saying is that it certainly looks peculiar when your journal starts off with 3 losers and you claim 93% win rate. you've already said you broke a bunch of rules and your web site looks like an infomercial. add it all up and it's easy to doubt you REALLY have a 93% win rate.
Gibbersih? No, it's called English. My trades aren't in question here. I never said I was sooooo good, as you put it. I asked what I thought was a simple question and somehow was unable to receive an answer from you.
I didnt mean to come off rude or argumentive. I was simply answering the question of trying to sell a newsletter. I dont mind questioning my trading that is what this journal is for. No offense taken. please dont take offense to my reply.
Good point. I must admit. from the outside looking in I would probably have the same questions and probably wouldnt be so nice about it.
Don't worry, I dont have a Math degree either but you do make a valid point. I was just contradicting you. Sometimes I dont play fair and my spelling SUCKS!!!