If you can incur 12 losses in a row with equanimity, then I admire your resolve if not your method.Quote from Ricter:
Some of you guys must have frikkin great edges if 12 losers in a row is enough to make you rework your systems. Must be nice.
12 is not that rare for me. I don't like it, but I deal with it by using small positions. It won't wipe me out.
Quote from Thunderdog:
If you can incur 12 losses in a row with equanimity, then I admire your resolve if not your method.
I'm sorry that I cannot get into specifics, but that is where the "edge" part comes in, for lack of a better term. That is where your unique powers of observation come in to systematically discern between "better" and "weaker" setups in order to treat them accordingly. What I have developed myself for ES does not work in currencies, and I am disinclined to share it anyway. In any event, this is the point where you test (and even develop) your own spices in various combinations to arrive at your own family meatloaf recipe. Bon apetit.Quote from Remiraz:
Hmmmm...how do you improve the quality of your signals? I mostly do currencies like the Euro. Since I use tight stops, one area where chain losers are likely is during tight whipsaw ranges. Any idea how to filter those? I don't mind missing good trades, i'll rather not experience another 9-in-a-row losing streak.![]()

Quote from Remiraz:
i'm starting to believe that LUCK is a very big part of trading.
say you design and backtested a system with 70% winners and 30% losers at 1:1 risk:reward ratio. a positive expectancy system no doubt.
your theoretical max losers would be 4 losers. (0.3 ^ 4 < 0.01) what this means is that your chances of having more than 4 losers are less than 1%.
however, your chances of having of say 20 losers in a row is: 0.3^20 = 0.00000000034 or 0.0000000034%.
This is STILL a positive percentage! Meaning it could happen! So do we actually have to be lucky enough to avoid having 20 losers in a row?