Ironheart hello … (not that hard head, so well done …)
I love your avatar!
Especially do not lose the ball …:eek:
Thank you for the very good work, simple and effective color parameter, thank you because I am “colorblind” …
A thousand apologies for my broken English …:o
Best regards:)
In previous posts some one asked about timeframes in MT4 (20 min chart )
Using “[B]Period Converter_opt[/B]” indicator u can make 20,25,35 timeframes
makeuse of it Thank you
I compared the MMACD line with a regular MACD indicator with (3,50,9) settings. They seem to match exactly in their movements and zero line crossovers. If these settings can be used with a regular MACD then maybe it’s not necessary to code the new MMACD at all?
I’d noticed something pretty similar.
This leads me on to the question:
If simply entering a trade based on a MACD cross is enough to get you reliably into good trades, why isn’t everyone doing this using a simple 1:1 RR and buying more Aston Martins and Bentleys than they know what to do with?
Mystic,
Reading the whole thread will give you the answer to that.
Entry is one thing, exits are where the winners are seperated from the losers.
Furthermore, it is not just about entry on the MMACD cross.
Lastly, trading success is only 20% about the strategy. 80% is about money management and psychology/state.
TraderAlan, I tested what you said and it looked rather different to me. Maybe I did something wrong.
Anyways, thank you so much Ironheart for the indicators…and
THANK YOU Tymen. You are a rare gem in this industry of self-motivated mecenaries.
I have learnt so much from this thread that is gonna give me a better edge in my trading.
I am gonna use your exit strategies with my own system. It is so simple that I am surprised I never saw it. My own Backtesting of my past trades this year, showed how powerful your BB analysis is. I could have tripled my pips just by using your exit strat, instead of fixed 1:1 and 2:1 exits.
Thank you again…
The actual values of the MMACD and MACD lines are different but their twists and turns and zero line crossovers appear exactly the same when overlaid one on top of other. Not taking anything from Tymen1 by mentioning this, his teaching has been great and am learning loads but mentioning something I noticed…
Weird…it does not line up for mine. The crossovers are rather different on mine. But not too worried about it. 
Hey nivlek78,
Don't get me wrong here, I am no dissenter. I've admired Tymen's approach and teaching style for some time now.. I'm a fan.
I also think it's healthy to spark some debate and probe this devloping strat as we move along. Unless i've missed something, entering on MMACD cross with the trend is the only entry discussed so far and we take every one (with long term trend). As you say, the devil is in the detail and exits are what turns the strat from a possible losing one to a reliable winning one. It does, though, just seem too easy to identify a good trade purely on the MMACD cross and as it mimics a basic MACD cross so closely, I just wonder why more folk don't use this as a mechanical entry approach with varying exit strats.Thats exactly what I’m doing for the moment:)
Hi Mystic,
Never said u were a dissenter. I apologise for coming across as slighting you. Sorry. 
I was just explaining that it is not as straightforward as “MACD crossovers”.
As you had mentioned about the long term trend.
Something as “simple” as factoring in long term trend or trading with 3 timeframes, makes a world of difference.
If you follow the thread, Tymen brought us through the formation of the rationale behind the MMACD entries and remember the example where he showed examples of how we can get whipsawed out of our profits if we traded every crossover?
I can bet you my trading account, that even with this strat in its entirety, you will have people who profit from it and those who lose from it.
Again, a strategy is just that, a strategy.
Even something as simple as trading fixed horizontal lines will work, with the proper MM and discipline.
For 2 mths, I traded purely off weekly opens and it yielded huge rewards for me, yet I know of many who got their whipsawed out of their butts, cos they did not understand the fundamentals behind the strategy and worse still, either got greedy or became scared and broke their MM rules.
Not sure if I am making any sense here but it is not about
"If fibo works, why dun everyone get rich from it?"
or
"If pivots works, why dun everyone get rich from it?“
or
"if stoch/macd/MAs/SR lines/“add your fave indicator here” works, why dun everyone get rich from it?”
It is that mentality, that causes one to play tricks on his/her own state and they start to take trades that makes no sense or avoid taking trades that makes sense.
Trading is simple. Human nature makes it complicated
Hope I made some sense. it is late here.
Think I will get off my pulpit before I overstay my welcome. Bad habit of mine
Thanks nivlek, i’m sure that we’re on the same page and both looking forward to the continuation of the thread here.
You make some very valid points and I was being more than a little glib in my comment about Aston Martins and Bentleys. The point I was very poorly trying to articulate is that I haven’t read many strats (and i’ve read a lot!) that rely just on this as a point of entry. There is usually a second or third confirmation indicator at play before a trade is taken. I realise that LT trend could be argued as our secondary indicator but it still seems all too easy. Maybe my mind just wants to see complication where simplicity is enough.
No need to apologies btw, I wasn’t sure if my comments made me look like a smart-arse trouble maker so I thought i’d clarify things 
Double post, could admin delete please?
Thanks.
I’m glad the indicator works for you and everyone else.
I agree with mystic. Never a good idea to blindly follow anything, especially when it’s to do with your money. Besides a little debate is fun and a good way to learn as long as no one takes offence. Tymen doesn’t strike me as someone who would take anything like that to heart.
Re: the MMACD, if I remember correctly, the MMACD or Modified MACD was just a regular MACD with the slow moving average set to the average of slow GMMA(Guppy 30,35,40,45,50,60) and the fast moving average set to the average of the fast GMMA (2,5,8,10,12,15).
Sorry too late for me to post right now. :o
Moving home is now uppermost in my mind.
(I have already stopped trading).
I will try to answer every post individually tomorrow, starting from where I left off.
Just a quick thank you to [B]IronHeart [/B]for his programming work.
Every post since I left off, is of [U]very high quality[/U] and I will be making certain points about them.
Tomorrow should see the close of this section of trading trends with indicators.
I am not keen to put a PDF about indicator trading together unless I get a strong demand for it.
[U]There is a reason for this[/U] - I am about to drop some [B]lead balloons[/B] and [B]clangers[/B]!! :eek: :eek:
[B]We will go on to naked trading where there is most definitely a trading method to be used!![/B]
TraderAlan is correct, the MMACD(3, 50) is exactly the same as MACD(3, 50).
Comparing the two on my end, the values are exactly the same too, which means the MMACD is working as it should.
One thing to note though - the signal line is different!
The normal MACD uses a 9 period SMA to construct the signal line whereas the MMACD uses a 9 period EMA to do it.
Hope this helps.
Hi tymen. I have been following this thread closely, just thought I would weigh in with my thoughts about the indicator trading PDF.
It seems like the indicator trading method is stand alone and profitable by itself. If you believe this to be true then I like the idea of a PDF, as we would be able to consider this system as fundamentally sound/profitable and be able to tailor it to our own personalities. But if the indicator system is merely a precursor to a stripped down methodology that you believe is more efficient and possibly better, then I think the PDF would be counter productive.
Either way, thanks for taking such good care of this thread, it’s definitely appreciated.
I too would like to see a PDF for the indicator based system. Even though I’ve been following this thread almost since the beginning, it would be nice to have all the info in one place for easy reference. But anything Tymen decides is fine with me.
I like pdfs regarding anything in trading as my reading chair is about as far from the computer as one can get in my little house. But it is nice to read about strategy, indicators, fundamentals, whatever without keeping one eye ****ed to the screen. Just the way I do things I guess. I vote for a pdf. d.
I’ve been following along daily for the last 70 pages and I’m happy to continue on without a PDF but I am eager to start trying this system live. From what I’ve read, most people have a pretty good grasp of everything to date but it might be helpful to get a single page in short or point form about what we’ve learned so far to make sure everyone is on the same page. Just the sort of note you would squeeze onto the back of your calculator before a test, nothing to time consuming:D