Why I know about confirmation on the other timeframe?
because of the following:

- TSD EAs were coded on more higheir timeframe confirmation http://www.forex-tsd.com/tsd-expert-advisors/
For example: trading on D1 taking the trend from W1 and so on.
But as we may see they had to use some filters to avoid "false" signals on reversal. I tested with one filtered indicator, then they decided to place two filter's indicators etc.

- classical old asctrend system is using confirmation on the other timeframe ASCTrend system
It is WPR indicators for MT4 and MTF indicators for other software. But they had to use many filters to avoid false signals as well. It works in this classical way but too many indicators sometimes on the chart to estimate this reversal and H4 and D1 timeframe.

- I tried to use more smaller timeframe for the confirmation in BrainTrading section http://www.forex-tsd.com/brain-systems/
The system (and EA) is trading on H1 confirming the trend with M15 timeframe. It works as well but the same story: too many indicators sometimes on the chart just to filter a one single false signal.

So, this confirmation will work but it will not be the simple strategy after development and filtered the signals and so on.

It may be the way for the development. One of the ways.

Yup, I see what you are saying.
So many filters looking for 100% trade probobility instead of settling for 75% and managing it correctly?
If you concentrate on not letting the 25% bad trades do to much damage, instead of trying to filter them, then maybe a decent system will be born.

But if we continue to look for 100% correct entries, system is doomed to failure.

__________________
FatCat

Have you tried my Signal Service?
http://ffs.ovenstone.net

If you have too many indicators to confirm a signal then you'll get in too late, and then as price fluctuates, it tells you to get out. Now the question is, am I getting in too late or will it go up further? With all systems, all looks good in the past just like backtesting, but in live testing, its not so easy....

Getting in is easy.
Whether to stay in or get out is the hard part.

__________________
FatCat

Have you tried my Signal Service?
http://ffs.ovenstone.net

I am in full agreement Kamper

There are many reasons why we as humans hunt for the complex whilst often missing the obvious which can be most remedial so I won't bother going into it all otherwise we will be here all day.

There are many great manual systems on this site (more than enough) but they are usually tossed aside for the next 'shiny toy' (method) that appears to be the gateway to riches. I have a few systems I use, most of which I have developed and added my own styling to from long years of experience with hard work (which many members here also don't know the meaning of, hence why they hunt for EA).

Most systems cannot be successfully placed into an EA and this does not mean they are too hard or the programmer is no good, it just requires that final bit of intuitiveness that a EA cannot provide. Let me give a very good example.

One of the most effective systems is the beautifully basic 50SMA on a M5 chart. By viewing the 50SMA and its angle you will gain at least one good short M5 trend per day per currency where you can scalp between 10 - 50 pips per bite but on average 15 - 25.
It is an extremely mechanical system with no fancy tricks requiring a millennia of indicators. However it cannot be EA-transformed. Why? Because glancing at the chart, the eye can quickly determine if the 50SMA is momentum bound and 'on its way'. Is it slowing down? Has the SMA started to flatten and how old is the trend?

These factors cannot be planted into EA but with trader knowledge and a little bit of work, there is no reason why you cannot make at least 500 pips a month.

Some things don't get any easier.

Pilot

Because there are two different conception.

1st conception.
People are attaching MTF indicators to the chart. For example, indicator was setted on D1 timeframe (1440) and attached to H1 (60) chart. I can not make any decision by MTF indicators in this case. I am using those MTF case just for information only and not for decision making about openning the order for buy or sell. It was some discussion on this thread Nonlagging Tools when one person said: "i can trade using MTF", i replied: "you can not", he said: "i will", i replied: "so, do it" and he traded live posting results on the thread. And in the end he said that he can not.
I am using MTF indicators just for information only. it is very difficult to do technical analysis as well using MTF. Just for information. may be, some people can trade using MTF only but it is really difficult.

2nd conception.
It is programming way of confirmation.
For example:
- attach one standard not-MTF indicator to H1 chart, for example.
and
- attach standard not-MTF indicator to D1 chart for confirmation.
Two charts. If we want to confirm by 3 timeframes so it is 3 charts.
It is programming way.
Why?
because of the following:
where:
int timeframe is timeframe;
int shift is bar for this timeframe.
If we want to confirm something on D1 timeframe so we will use this D1 timeframe/chart/bars, right? Thus, it is not like attaching MTF indicator with D1 setting to H1 chart. No any MTF in this coding and no any H4 timeframe. Just one chart and bars for this one chart/timeframe.

When somebody is asking the coder to code some system based on MTF indicators so the coder will implement the 2nd conception. But the idea creator may think about 1st conception:
- idea creator will see "good chart" with MTF indicators waiting for the coder to do the same with EA.
- coder will not look at "very good" milti-timeframed chart and will code this idea according to his programming undertanding (2nd conception).

If we are talking about confirmation on the other timeframe so we are talking about 2nd conception.

Sorry for very complecate explanation but it was my experience.
May be, I am retrograde but some months/years ago people used different chart/timeframes when they wanted to confirm the signals.

Trying to imitate a manual way of trading in an automated system is not necessary and doomed to fail.

Manual - one way of trading, takes years to develop and perfect.

Automated - another way of trading, also takes years to develop and perfect.

Both ways can lead to valid methods, but both take hard work and ingenuity. It's just what works for you...

Simple and yet effective. I trade a similar setup on EUR/USD and GBP/USD on a correlation type basis.
Put 2 SMMA (Smoothed - HL/2) on the chart, one at 55 the other at 21, both on M5 chart.
If they both cross on both charts, usually a good trade, can also be traded independantly very happily.
Seems we have similar logic to trading M5 charts Pilot?


Edited to add graphic and some more text.
I attach a screenshot from Friday, which was good day for this type of dual pair verification.

I opened long trades on both and closed them later in the day purely because of the weekend, otherwise I would hve let them continue till turn.

Attached Images

M5MA's.jpg (25.8 KB, 178 views)

__________________
FatCat

Have you tried my Signal Service?
http://ffs.ovenstone.net

Coz the people are looking for the Holy Grail sistem , and not using the simple strategies.....such a pity!

I like the simple one also, Support and Resistance + MACD. Lets get to the basic indicators.

Nic

__________________
Nic
Free Forex Strategy Communication Items