Conrad:
I hear what you are saying, and I do not disagree.
...I probably do not understand why it is not clear that symmetry can be obtained in any number of ways. Karw also mentioned this.
I know, but I'm looking for input from anyone interested so that we can 'get to' an algorithm that is acceptable to most (not necessarily everyone would or could be satisfied in this regard).
..to some of us it is simply a matter of specifying what you want to achieve as an end-result for the trading mechanism and we can create a function to achieve it.
Ahh! There's the rub! I think I mentioned in an earlier post that what I'd like to acheive is a change to the algorithm such that it has results similar to what Lichello intended, but not with the inconsistencies that are apparent to so many of us. If we could get there, then we wouldn't spend so much time 'tweaking' the damn thing.
So from an end-result standpoint, what I would want is:
- A tool (set of calcs) that doesn't 'Die Out' after a few cycles.
- One that would operate effectively regardless of the price trend over time.
- One that would be effective regardless of whether I set Minimum %'s at 5, 10 or 15%.
- One that would not 'act funny' due to the Safe setting (although I've pretty much abandoned that value).
- One that doesn't require manual resetting (conditions would dictate this action internally and automatically if required).
Is this too much to ask? <smile>
I've mentioned before that I'm no math whiz. And, can't say enough how appreciative I am that you and others have been so willing to spend your valuable time explaining what we feel in terms that are more concrete (if I can muddle though all of that Algebra) and understandable.
So I guess I'm going to spend some time tonight working through the rest of your post. If I can get through it, then maybe the light will go off!
Thanks (Sincerely!) and Regards, Steve
Best Regards, Steve (The Grabber)
AI
