@tradermike1234 The same can be said for any pattern.
Ifvgs are more advanced though so I can understand many people thinking it's bad because they struggled with it.
@GrahamStephan Like most your content but you should refute the ideas. When you act this way it looks like the idea is actually good and you're just emotional about it. I'd be interested in a more analytical response.
@LuukeJohnston@RealKidPoker This right here. He has double standard and has become a hypocrite influenced by X right wing bubble. One of the saddest downfalls I've seen on here.
I HIT 5K FOLLOWERS π₯
To celebrate, Iβm giving away 5 spots in the 6 week program for FREE (usually $229)
To enter:
Follow me
Retweet this
Tag 3 trading friends who could benefit from this
Winners will be chosen on X tomorrow
(donβt tag random trading mentors, if you do your entry wonβt count)
@Mc5calpAfee@Joseph_Montrose I'm not rage bating. The 80% is a statistical outcome, not trading winrate.
As you pointed out - you have your own entry, take tp and exit as you see with structure. That's good and exactly what I'm saying, you're using your own discretion to make it work. I agree with you
@Mc5calpAfee@Joseph_Montrose Yea you're mistaken. That's exactly where everyone goes wrong. The chance to break the high not the same as the win rate.
Many times, price will be right at the high and break it the next candle. Those count towards the 80% but not towards win rate of a model with it.
@Mc5calpAfee@Joseph_Montrose Ya that might be all that's needed. I suspect that changes the r:r and win rate dynamics of the model significantly. If it's just entered at a 50% tap with stop at opposite side it is negative EV, 1-1R less than 50% winrate.