Consistent Losers

[drayco]

I am sure it has been tried many times,but why not try again?
What is your most consitent losing strategy? The one that makes a good number of trades and loses darn near all of them. Let's take the worst of the worst and trade opposite and have the best sytem ever!
MA crosses generally end bad and take back the profit, so somewhere in that trade is a good entry for the opposite. Parabolic SAR usually ends badly.
Does anyone have a really rotten system that could be a good starting point?

[drayco]

Most signal providers would be very good for this except at some point they would catch on and reverse their own signals before they send them out and put you on the wrong side once again.
Some really bad consistently losing software would be ideal. Wouldn't have to worry about someone messing up the losing method.

[yardie]

Drayco your post is funny but not without merit hehe.

[ThomasB]

This is kind of smart though - start using a random strategy, and if it loses money, you reverse the signal and it will be profitable...

[drayco]

I remember when i first took an interest in the Forex, i did a trial with some guy named Angel Kolev (or something like that) and during my trial every single trade he signalled was a big loser. I would love to know his method for picking losers because he was one of the best and that is what i am looking for.

[bobnat]

I don't think the reason people lose is because of a bad system.

If you did what you propose, you'd still be faced with the same issues that people fail to deal with and these issues are why people lose: taking signals without fail, cutting losers and holding onto winners. These are the things that people screw up on, not their systems.

Nat

[drayco]

I would even be interested in systems that got providers tossed from robots (like FxAuto and Collective 2) with disgrace for having a terrible long string of losers with huge gigantic drawdown.
I would like to know what the system was when it was really bad and if they tweaked it to make it better, but made it worse, then show me the tweaked version as well.

[ampris2000]

i mentioned the following before but people didn't understand what i was trying to say and i perhaps didn't bring myself across as clear as possible.

anyways, i think a system in itself can work 100% of the time.

the failure comes to the analysis portion of all the time frames and price action. A "robot" could be programmed for proper analysis but you'd need a programming team to do that. It would be huge. The human brain can work faster and interpret data easier than it would be to program those same thought processes.

having said that, i believe it's not the system that's the failure. it's the failure of the person to analyze ALL data and time frames. From the monthly on down to the 1 minute.

if you're getting a sell signal on four hour chart, you sell and it goes up against you... was it the system or the analysis?
If you analyze it, there may have been a divergence on the 30 minute time frame or even the 1 hour
AND/OR
Prices could have been hitting support on the monthly chart.
Those are just some examples.

Just looking at the AUD/USD, it broke upwards and it looks like on the four hour that broke the downtrend. maybe it has maybe it hasn't.
On the 15 minute there is divergence that it may go down.
there was divergence on the 3 hour as well before it shot up. so I was just waiting for the signals to become buy and i caught 122 pips from that.

before it shot up, the macd-h on the daily time frame was also showing a divergence.

I have yet to figure out how to program a robot to look for divergences. i'll be glad when i come up with a program to do that. in the meantime, i don't think these systems that are made by people are programmed to analyze everything properly.

I thought of writing one, but then I know how much of a bear the program would be. it's much easier for me to look at the screen and let my brain do all the work. much faster and easier.