More trades means more risks ?

[Glenn]

Wysi
"Are you talking about just binary outcomes?"
No, it's not about a 'winner takes all' approach.
To refer to Grey1's formula, the expectancy related to the Average win.
So we are comparing how likely it is that the average win will be achieved from two systems with the same expectancy.
We could also compare them on the basis of how often they achieve a less (or more) than average win.
My thoughts on this are thay we would get the same result. Perhaps this needs futher debate.

The basic problem is how does one compare two systems which have the same expectancy but achieve the same outcome with different numbers of trades.
As we have discussed, there is the mathematical side and the 'human' side to look consider.

Grey1
I agree all your thoughts about positive expectancy for any one system.
But I don't think you have understood what I am saying.
I am trying to compare two systems which achieve the same outcome, each having the same expectancy, but one trading more than the other.

Tony
Agree what you say - for one system.
It's how to compare two that we are looking at.
Glenn

 

[Grey1]

Glen ,

I do understand what you saying and I have addressed it before .. number of trades has already been included in average win/loss figure.. We dont care how we derived the average win/loss ...

I can trade 30 times and my average win to be $500 or 3 times to have an average win of.. $500. Does it really matter how the system gave me the average win NO ...

Been a good thread ..

Regards

 

[TheBramble]

I am trying to compare two systems which achieve the same outcome, each having the same expectancy, but one trading more than the other.

If they have the same expectancy AND the same outcome AND each of the two systems use a trading system with the same probability of success - they can't have a different number of trades.