That is a very real possibility. I have found that a lot of systems that have been used manually are reported to do much better than they do if the rules are followed mechanically over every instance available. I think either there's often a bit of discretion used with manual systems (even when the user doesn't realize it), or when first evaluating a system found, the user often uses earlier entrance and exit points than otherwise noted. For example, in this strategy we wait until the close of the bar before we make any decision on a bar, thus putting us behind price action by up to an hour. When traded manually, the user can determine whether the two lines crossing is from a "strong" or "weak" movement. If it's strong, they can choose to exit much earlier than the mechanical system allows. Additionally, sometimes people's minds may dismiss certain losses and concentrate on certain wins when first developing a system, thus convincing themselves that the system is better than it really is.

I am *NOT* saying that Lepiricus has fallen victim to any thing like this. I'm just saying I've seen this type of behavior before in trading systems. Lurk around forums enough, then test the EAs that emerge for a system, and you'll likely find the same thing a lot.

It seems testing out different SL/TP levels using 15/30min charts instead of 30/60min could prove lucrative as well. Maybe this should be evaluated on a longer-term setup as well. Who knows. I'm simply providing the ability for people to take this strategy where they want. Give people a framework for finding things out for themselves about this system. Besides, I've been getting quite rusty at programming by not doing it for quite a while, and I figured smaller programs like EAs would be a great way to shake some of the cobwebs off.

Has anybody discovered any new errors that exist with this version (v0.3.2-beta) of the EA thus far?

-MRE-