hey funyoo the SL not working here...can you give the latest version with proper SL

You are right,

Here is a fixed version.

2. Originally Posted by Ralfiery
Hi john. I think you answared that yourself in your post 119 - But again - That way one is making pips -while the other is adding on positions !!
but if the system is buying and selling to hedge is a waste, the system has worked fine without one buy side and one sell side going at a time, it would seem to me that all you are doing is increasing risk with no additional profit, this is just my opinion and dont think that i am trying to tell you what to do or other wise just trying to understand your reasoning behind do it is all.
thanks
john

3. Hi All,
I was discussing this in another thread but it is also pertinent here on Ilan. I proposed to close trades as they go on the losing side of the T/P point instead of letting them just get larger... I'll try to explain...with Martingale when a buy order is entered a T/P is also set.... higher. When the value of the currency changes it either closes the order at a profit (the T/P) or goes down the Pip Step value and a second order is entered with a new T/P (and bigger lot size). The T/P of the first order is also changed to the new T/P value of the second order. As a third order is entered all the orders are modified to change their T/P values to the T/P value of the third order. But now depending on your EA T/P and/or Pipstep "Input" values when the value of the currency finally goes up to the T/P point the first order will be closed at a small loss while the 2nd and 3rd orders, which have larger lot sizes, will close at a profit. (If you have many open orders you could also have multiple losing orders). Could order "One" be closed at a small loss when order three is created? As the loss from Order one only gets larger as additional orders are created. This way we can avoid the growing additional loses as additional orders are created. Kind of like a Stop loss triggered by the T/P value. Once an order goes on the losing side of the T/P.... close it automatically instead of letting it turn into a bigger loss. Another GREAT reason to close orders that can never go positive is that you won't be using up your "Margin" on dead orders, which is always a concern...especially with Martingale! Anyone up to the challenge??
Also, although we now have 1.42SL it doesn't perform the same as earlier versions set with the same parameters??. I've found that 1.41SL seems to be the most productive.
Thanks again Bill

4. Originally Posted by BillR
Hi All,
I was discussing this in another thread but it is also pertinent here on Ilan. I proposed to close trades as they go on the losing side of the T/P point instead of letting them just get larger... I'll try to explain...with Martingale when a buy order is entered a T/P is also set.... higher. When the value of the currency changes it either closes the order at a profit (the T/P) or goes down the Pip Step value and a second order is entered with a new T/P (and bigger lot size). The T/P of the first order is also changed to the new T/P value of the second order. As a third order is entered all the orders are modified to change their T/P values to the T/P value of the third order. But now depending on your EA T/P and/or Pipstep "Input" values when the value of the currency finally goes up to the T/P point the first order will be closed at a small loss while the 2nd and 3rd orders, which have larger lot sizes, will close at a profit. (If you have many open orders you could also have multiple losing orders). Could order "One" be closed at a small loss when order three is created? As the loss from Order one only gets larger as additional orders are created. This way we can avoid the growing additional loses as additional orders are created. Kind of like a Stop loss triggered by the T/P value. Once an order goes on the losing side of the T/P.... close it automatically instead of letting it turn into a bigger loss. Another GREAT reason to close orders that can never go positive is that you won't be using up your "Margin" on dead orders, which is always a concern...especially with Martingale! Anyone up to the challenge??
Also, although we now have 1.42SL it doesn't perform the same as earlier versions set with the same parameters??. I've found that 1.41SL seems to be the most productive.
Thanks again Bill
Hello Bill .

Good thinking - but - The "dead orders" VALUE when they finaly goes back to TP point is included in the calculation of TP - therefore TP will further away if you close them !! or you must add even bigger lots - so no difference there .

5. Here is my statement from last week with this EA

Regards

6. Hi Ralfery,
You are correct that it may goof up the setting of the T/P value....but the best way to solve that problem would be to set the T/P value were it should be.....but still get rid of the "dead" orders before they get to be large/expensive dead orders.... You bring up a "problem" I REALLY noticed last Friday when the EURAUD dropped 800 pips without a retrace to close my open orders at a profit.....AS additional orders are created the number of Pips needed to close all changes up or down, but not as far as the new order did...So as new larger size orders are created the value of the currency has to move FARTHER to close all. So the First order would have a T/p 50 pips away from the order....the Tenth order has the T/p point to close ALL orders 100 pips away. That's a problem as the Tenth order has a VERY large size...and brings you much closer to blowing out the account (all those now very expensive dead orders aren't helping now either). I compared it to another EA that has a "fixed" T/p value......fixed value is MUCH better.

7. Having to go only 50 Pips to close ALL the orders when you have 10 open orders...., instead of 100 Pips,...... is a much better situation.....

8. Hello Funyoo . Can you make obtion so EA -ALSO SUSPEND THE FIRST - open when over/under MA. filter . and maybe good MM .

BTW. auto TP - SL - MA filter all works good .

9. ## statement

Hi guys..sorry about not posting B4...I've testing this EA for las 2 weeks on differents acnts...here's the last statement for one of them.

Hope you all like it

peace