I'm in a "green Land" with three trades/5 and I'm waiting for the last 2 trades.
The final Holy Grail!
- Thread starter medbs
- Start date
- Status
let's just take the gbpusd trade as an example, it went -675 pips in the red, an unrealised loss/drawdown from the 5150 area entry to the current 4475 area low...so assuming that joe trader has a $100k balance in his a/c at entry and uses a 5:1 leverage on the trade that is effectively $50/pip...that one trade went offiside by $50 x 675 =$33,750 = 33.75% of the acc opening balance...even at the 3:1 leverage you belatedly stated you used that was -20.25% drawdown on account on this one trade, let alone the others...add in the others and, well I'll let someone else do the maths, but even at 3:1 leverage, your account was suffering from a huge unrealised loss/drawdown.
Most retail traders are not interested in 2:1 or 3:1 or even 5:1 leverage, they are generally underfunded and use far higher leverages which on these last trades in the sample you have provided, would have probably wiped them out.
That is surely the point you are missing Medbs?
Most retail traders are not interested in 2:1 or 3:1 or even 5:1 leverage, they are generally underfunded and use far higher leverages which on these last trades in the sample you have provided, would have probably wiped them out.
That is surely the point you are missing Medbs?
Last edited:
This strategy is stupid because it places the emphasis on '100% success rate' over above just about everything else. So things like, money management, stops, risk:reward, are not important so long as the 100% strategy is maintained. It's as if you're admitting 'Yes im currently losing £££'s on this trade, but so long as I keep the trade opened it wont become a losing trade no matter how much I lose' - how ***ked up is that!
What's more, the irony is that successful traders can afford to have a less than 100% successful strategy and still make more money than you.
What's more, the irony is that successful traders can afford to have a less than 100% successful strategy and still make more money than you.
Psychology behind this is that meds wants to do everything he can to prove he is right, because he lacked some stuff in his childhood. And of course the trades are fake, for sure
I will answer you, just because you're a rookie.
Since i started posting in this thread, I made 13/13 safely trades, all these "respected" members who are talking so much, don't tell anything, until I put here five highly risky trades, and they began their "show", Do you get the picture?
After I brought this attention, keep an eye on this thread, until the end of May, and watch if they will say one single word when I'll make only safely trades with practically 15 or 20 pips risk.
medbs, you are not answering the questions asked....lets say for eg that before your 5150 entry area is achieved again, the lib dems announce that they have broken off talks with the conservatives and that they are talking to labour or worst still from the gbpusd point of view that they can't do a labour deal either and that in any event they would vote down a queens speech by either, the pairing tanks, let's say to 1.4000 will you continue to hold for the sake of being right?
Last edited:
i have no problem with trading with wide stops but i should then use very low leverage and my target should be wide as well ...
LOL @ This entire thread.
There are some facts people seem to be forgetting. There are a million different ways in which to trade profitably. Some mean winning only 20% of the time but the winners being much bigger than the losers and some strategies like this one are the complete opposite!
I mean, come on guys - If he has a decent sized account and he is trading this strategy with low leverage, provided he can tell the difference between a high risk and low risk setup with his own strategy then he's doing nothing stupid.
I agree that he won't have a 100% success rate for any substantial amount of time, he will lose eventually but if he's already took 500K profit from a 100K account before the account goes bust then he's still made a monster profit.
Attitude to risk is a personal thing... Most people with a bit of sense stick to 3% or less of their account I guess but one size doesn't have to fit all.
Medbs - Fair play, you keep calling them right as far as your strategy is concerned. Please don't ever promote this strategy as one that a newb should use because eventually there will be a loser and it will be big. I assume that in reality you must know this?
There are some facts people seem to be forgetting. There are a million different ways in which to trade profitably. Some mean winning only 20% of the time but the winners being much bigger than the losers and some strategies like this one are the complete opposite!
I mean, come on guys - If he has a decent sized account and he is trading this strategy with low leverage, provided he can tell the difference between a high risk and low risk setup with his own strategy then he's doing nothing stupid.
I agree that he won't have a 100% success rate for any substantial amount of time, he will lose eventually but if he's already took 500K profit from a 100K account before the account goes bust then he's still made a monster profit.
Attitude to risk is a personal thing... Most people with a bit of sense stick to 3% or less of their account I guess but one size doesn't have to fit all.
Medbs - Fair play, you keep calling them right as far as your strategy is concerned. Please don't ever promote this strategy as one that a newb should use because eventually there will be a loser and it will be big. I assume that in reality you must know this?
i DIDN'T SEE such a case before and I don't think that I will.
The question is not if I 'am right or not.
So far, this strategy gave me only positive trades.
- Status