Ideas are super nice buttttttttt !!!!!!

[Euler]

You have to hit the sweet spot in terms of liquidity. Different sports exhibit different characteristics at different times, so timing you entry or exit to hit that sweet spot is key.

[darchas]

I'm just here for the 'super nice butt'!!!

[goat68]

I'm slowly coming to the conclusion on pre-race horses for automation being near nigh impossible...
Take a theoretical example, say I come up with a set of parameters for price, volume, matched etc, that seems over history to show positive expectancy, call it strategyA.
We know that if say 100+ other auto traders also happen to come up with strategyA at roughly this same time, then going forward strategyA will very likely perform negatively.
The competition is so high that although this scenario is "theoretical", it's probably actually quite common.
So what does this mean?
So to be "profitable" you either have to:
1) Come up with something so unique and profitable that no-one else is likely to have found it
2) Come up with a strategyB that probably has a negative expectancy in the past history

So what is (2)!? So how do you come up with a strategy that no-one else is likely to have found?(1) A: You think of what looks like a negative one, that you "hope" will be positive going forward...! What idiot would try that?!

Anyway... you can see how I theorise this is "impossible" !

[goat68]

The other thing with automation and manual, as Shaun and co have said, there are guys like Peter, Michael, Liam, Mo, ... who make a mint from this game, but they've been studying this for years/decades. Why should "goat" think he can rock up to this bar in 1 year (tomorrow ), and start even making a tiny fraction of what they do....? it ain't going to happen! The "diamonds" at the end of the mine are years away...
So why should I or anyone do this given that predicament? A: because I/we are not doing it for the money, we're doing it for the fun, social connection, mental challenge (especially at my age!), and keeping us all sane in this mad Covid era....

[craignmoss]

A couple of months in and this thread has really brought me back down to earth. I assumed after 2 years I'd be profitable and have an idea of what I'm doing, now I'm beginning to doubt myself. All that said, I'm determined and grateful for the help given by the community. I'll check those looks out straight away (feel free to send any more my way)!

[decomez6]

over history to show positive
So what does this mean?
So to be "profitable" you either have to:
1) Come up with something so unique and profitable that no-one else is likely to have found it
2) Come up with a strategyB that probably has a negative expectancy in the past history

So what is (2)!? So how do you come up with a strategy that no-one else is likely to have found?(1) A: You think of what looks like a negative one, that you "hope" will be positive going forward...! What idiot would try that?!

I think any data is useful in one way or another .
- if the strategy is so unique and you realise that a bandwagon effect has taken over , then take the opposing approach and use the original as a yardstick.
As a matter of fact , you are only able to see the bandwagon only because you were there in the beginning, the joy riders will have a rude awakening when the wagon pass destination without them realising it .
That’s your edge!! Collateral miss calcareous

[goat68]

over history to show positive
So what does this mean?
So to be "profitable" you either have to:
1) Come up with something so unique and profitable that no-one else is likely to have found it
2) Come up with a strategyB that probably has a negative expectancy in the past history

So what is (2)!? So how do you come up with a strategy that no-one else is likely to have found?(1) A: You think of what looks like a negative one, that you "hope" will be positive going forward...! What idiot would try that?!

I think any data is useful in one way or another .
- if the strategy is so unique and you realise that a bandwagon effect has taken over , then take the opposing approach and use the original as a yardstick.
As a matter of fact , you are only able to see the bandwagon only because you were there in the beginning, the joy riders will have a rude awakening when the wagon pass destination without them realising it .
That’s your edge!! Collateral miss calcareous

ah got you! that's a really good point, realizing the band wagon has past and taking the opposing view selling to all that "dumb money"..., of course.

[ShaunWhite]

We know that if say 100+ other auto traders also happen to come up with strategyA at roughly this same time, then going forward strategyA will very likely perform negatively.

It's not so much about someone landing upon the same strategy, it's that when you go live you start actually taking money from people which you don't do in a test. For you to start winning the winners have to win less and/or the losers lose more. Strategy fade rather than instant death is more common because it's unlikley you're affecting one or two people a lot, and more likely you're affecting a lot of people by a little, so the gravy train takes a while to slow down.

Strategies almost always need some degree of hand holding. You launch, it works, it fades, you adjust, it improves and round and round you go possibly 3 or 4 times a year....and then there's other strategies that come and go that aren't at all like yours but affect it. It's a constant battle and why automation can be a fulltime job just maintaining a level, if you stop peddling the machine slows down.

[stueytrader]

Firstly, I love the way on this forum so often a random and very low poster posts once, then creates a massive discussion that follows (despite the fact that the OP disappears/cares less)

But, back to the topic - I'm almost entirely manual, and always have been. Though I do use 'automation' in the sense that I use occasional cashouts, and always the 'take SP' functionality (if that counts as automation at all?).

I have always presumed that successful automation still relies essentially on the human calculation and judgement? An automation could either be profitable or losing, dependent on how it is set up. And that choice remains the manual part, unless automation is writing code and setting itself up?

Interestingly, I'm manual, but I have a degree in computing and I am fairly highly qualified in statistics. I have just never found myself wanting to let go of the control of my trading selections/process using automation. Maybe my areas of function just don't fit with that - I like flexibility.

[stueytrader]

Plus, knowing a fair bit about computing, I don't trust those 'errors' that could occur - when my bank is on the line!

[Euler]

Most of my automation has its core in a manual trading strategy that I've simply refined and improved with automation.

I'll work on one part of it, the entry, the exit or something similar and gradually expand and improve it. I'll then start tweaking and testing and often end up with strategies at opposite ends but both profitable.

The unemotional execution edge you get is helpful. But also the ability to exactly quantify something. So that can lead you in new directions.

[stueytrader]

Most of my automation has its core in a manual trading strategy that I've simply refined and improved with automation.

I'll work on one part of it, the entry, the exit or something similar and gradually expand and improve it. I'll then start tweaking and testing and often end up with strategies at opposite ends but both profitable.

The unemotional execution edge you get is helpful. But also the ability to exactly quantify something. So that can lead you in new directions.

Can appreciate that defining your manual approaches in quantifiable way is a useful aspect of automation yes. I suppose my own trading approaches are just less applicable - for a start I base selections of some fundamentals of the selection/race, which is a lot more difficult to quantify in a program (i.e. I judge a lot of variable information before making a selection). It would be possible, but the time to program it would probably take me a lifetime - I'd be retired before it worked.

[rik]

Most of my automation has its core in a manual trading strategy that I've simply refined and improved with automation.

I'll work on one part of it, the entry, the exit or something similar and gradually expand and improve it. I'll then start tweaking and testing and often end up with strategies at opposite ends but both profitable.

The unemotional execution edge you get is helpful. But also the ability to exactly quantify something. So that can lead you in new directions.

You are using Guardian with Excel for all your automated trading right?