Disclaimer: None of this is financial advice. I have no idea what I'm doing. Please do your own research or you will certainly lose money. I'm not a statistician, data scientist, well-seasoned trader, or anything else that would qualify me to make statements such as the below with any weight behind them. Take them for the incoherent ramblings that they are. submitted by
TL;DR at the bottom for those not interested in the details.
This is a bit of a novel, sorry about that. It was mostly for getting my own thoughts organized, but if even one person reads the whole thing I will feel incredibly accomplished.
For those of you not familiar, please see the various threads on this trading system here.
I can't take credit for this system, all glory goes to ParallaxFX
I wanted to see how effective this system was at H1 for a couple of reasons: 1) My current broker is TD Ameritrade - their Forex minimum is a mini lot, and I don't feel comfortable enough yet with the risk to trade mini lots on the higher timeframes(i.e. wider pip swings) that ParallaxFX's system uses, so I wanted to see if I could scale it down. 2) I'm fairly impatient, so I don't like to wait days and days with my capital tied up just to see if a trade is going to win or lose.
This does mean it requires more active attention since you are checking for setups once an hour instead of once a day or every 4-6 hours, but the upside is that you trade more often this way so you end up winning or losing faster and moving onto the next trade. Spread does eat more of the trade this way, but I'll cover this in my data below - it ends up not being a problem.
I looked at data from 6/11 to 7/3 on all pairs with a reasonable spread(pairs listed at bottom above the TL;DR). So this represents about 3-4 weeks' worth of trading. I used mark(mid) price charts. Spreadsheet link is below for anyone that's interested.
I'm pretty much using ParallaxFX's system textbook, but since there are a few options in his writeups, I'll include all the discretionary points here:
- I'm using the stop entry version - so I wait for the price to trade beyond the confirmation candle(in the direction of my trade) before entering. I don't have any data to support this decision, but I've always preferred this method over retracement-limit entries. Maybe I just like the feeling of a higher winrate even though there can be greater R:R using a limit entry. Variety is the spice of life.
- I put my stop loss right at the opposite edge of the confirmation candle. NOT at the edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. I'll get into this more below - not enough trades are saved to justify the wider stops. (Wider stop means less $ per pip won, assuming you still only risk 1%).
- All my profit/loss statistics are based on a 1% risk per trade. Because 1 is real easy to multiply.
- There are definitely some questionable trades in here, but I tried to make it as mechanical as possible for evaluation purposes. They do fit the definitions of the system, which is why I included them. You could probably improve the winrate by being more discretionary about your trades by looking at support/resistance or other techniques.
- I didn't use MBB much for either entering trades, or as support/resistance indicators. Again, trying to be pretty mechanical here just for data collection purposes. Plus, we all make bad trading decisions now and then, so let's call it even.
- As stated in the title, this is for H1 only. These results may very well not play out for other time frames - who knows, it may not even work on H1 starting this Monday. Forex is an unpredictable place.
- I collected data to show efficacy of taking profit at three different levels: -61.8%, -100% and -161.8% fib levels described in the system using the passive trade management method(set it and forget it). I'll have more below about moving up stops and taking off portions of a position.
And now for the fun. Results!
- Total Trades: 241
- Raw Winrates:
- TP at -61.8%: 177 out of 241: 73.44%
- TP at -100%: 156 out of 241: 64.73%
- TP at -161.8%: 121 out of 241: 50.20%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
- TP at -61.8%: 5.22%
- TP at -100%: 23.55%
- TP at -161.8%: 29.14%
As you can see, a higher target ended up with higher profit despite a much lower winrate. This is partially just how things work out with profit targets in general, but there's an additional point to consider in our case: the spread. Since we are trading on a lower timeframe, there is less overall price movement and thus the spread takes up a much larger percentage of the trade than it would if you were trading H4, Daily or Weekly charts. You can see exactly how much it accounts for each trade in my spreadsheet if you're interested. TDA does not have the best spreads, so you could probably improve these results with another broker.
EDIT: I grabbed typical spreads from other brokers, and turns out while TDA is pretty competitive on majors, their minors/crosses are awful! IG beats them by 20-40% and Oanda beats them 30-60%! Using IG spreads for calculations increased profits considerably (another 5% on top) and Oanda spreads increased profits massively (another 15%!). Definitely going to be considering another broker than TDA for this strategy. Plus that'll allow me to trade micro-lots, so I can be more granular(and thus accurate) with my position sizing and compounding.
A Note on Spread
As you can see in the data, there were scenarios where the spread was 80% of the overall size of the trade(the size of the confirmation candle that you draw your fibonacci retracements over), which would obviously cut heavily into your profits.
Removing any trades where the spread is more than 50% of the trade width improved profits slightly without removing many trades, but this is almost certainly just coincidence on a small sample size. Going below 40% and even down to 30% starts to cut out a lot of trades for the less-common pairs, but doesn't actually change overall profits at all(~1% either way).
However, digging all the way down to 25% starts to really make some movement. Profit at the -161.8% TP level jumps up to 37.94%
if you filter out anything with a spread that is more than 25% of the trade width! And this even keeps the sample size fairly large at 187 total trades.
You can get your profits all the way up to 48.43%
at the -161.8% TP level if you filter all the way down to only trades where spread is less than 15% of the trade width, however your sample size gets much smaller at that point(108 trades) so I'm not sure I would trust that as being accurate in the long term.
Overall based on this data, I'm going to only take trades where the spread is less than 25% of the trade width. This may bias my trades more towards the majors, which would mean a lot more correlated trades as well(more on correlation below), but I think it is a reasonable precaution regardless.
Time of Day
Time of day had an interesting effect on trades. In a totally predictable fashion, a vast majority of setups occurred during the London and New York sessions: 5am-12pm Eastern. However, there was one outlier where there were many setups on the 11PM bar - and the winrate was about the same as the big hours in the London session. No idea why this hour in particular - anyone have any insight? That's smack in the middle of the Tokyo/Sydney overlap, not at the open or close of either.
On many of the hour slices I have a feeling I'm just dealing with small number statistics here since I didn't have a lot of data when breaking it down by individual hours. But here it is anyway - for all TP levels, these three things showed up(all in Eastern time):
- 7pm-4am: Fewer setups, but winrate high.
- 5am-6am: Lots of setups, but but winrate low.
- 12pm-3pm Medium number of setups, but winrate low.
I don't have any reason to think these timeframes would maintain this behavior over the long term. They're almost certainly meaningless. EDIT: When you de-dup highly correlated trades, the number of trades in these timeframes really drops, so from this data there is no reason to think these timeframes would be any different than any others in terms of winrate.
That being said, these time frames work out for me pretty well because I typically sleep 12am-7am Eastern time. So I automatically avoid the 5am-6am timeframe, and I'm awake for the majority of this system's setups.
Moving stops up to breakeven
This section goes against everything I know and have ever heard about trade management. Please someone find something wrong with my data. I'd love for someone to check my formulas, but I realize that's a pretty insane time commitment to ask of a bunch of strangers.
Anyways. What I found was that for these trades moving stops up...basically at all...actually reduced the overall profitability.
One of the data points I collected while charting was where the price retraced back to after hitting a certain milestone. i.e. once the price hit the -61.8% profit level, how far back did it retrace before hitting the -100% profit level(if at all)? And same goes for the -100% profit level - how far back did it retrace before hitting the -161.8% profit level(if at all)?
Well, some complex excel formulas later and here's what the results appear
to be. Emphasis on appears because I honestly don't believe it. I must have done something wrong here, but I've gone over it a hundred times and I can't find anything out of place.
- Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
- Winrate: 46.4%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 5.36%
- Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
- Winrate: 65.97%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): -1.01% (yes, a net loss)
Now, you might think exactly what I did when looking at these numbers: oof, the spread killed us there right? Because even when you move your SL to 0%, you still end up paying the spread, so it's not truly "breakeven". And because we are trading on a lower timeframe, the spread can be pretty hefty right?
Well even when I manually modified the data so that the spread wasn't subtracted(i.e. "Breakeven" was truly +/- 0), things don't look a whole lot better, and still way worse than the passive trade management method of leaving your stops in place and letting it run. And that isn't even a realistic scenario because to adjust out the spread you'd have to move your stoploss inside the candle edge by at least the spread amount, meaning it would almost certainly be triggered more often than in the data I collected(which was purely based on the fib levels and mark price). Regardless, here are the numbers for that scenario:
- Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
- Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 46.4%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 17.97%
- Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
- Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 65.97%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 11.60%
From a literal standpoint, what I see behind this behavior is that 44 of the 69 breakeven trades(65%!) ended up being profitable to -100% after retracing deeply(but not to the original SL level), which greatly helped offset the purely losing trades better than the partial profit taken at -61.8%. And 36 went all the way back to -161.8% after a deep retracement without hitting the original SL. Anyone have any insight into this? Is this a problem with just not enough data? It seems like enough trades that a pattern should emerge, but again I'm no expert.
I also briefly looked at moving stops to other lower levels (78.6%, 61.8%, 50%, 38.2%, 23.6%), but that didn't improve things any. No hard data to share as I only took a quick look - and I still might have done something wrong overall.
The data is there to infer other strategies if anyone would like to dig in deep(more explanation on the spreadsheet below). I didn't do other combinations because the formulas got pretty complicated and I had already answered all the questions I was looking to answer.
2-Candle vs Confirmation Candle Stops
Another interesting point is that the original system has the SL level(for stop entries) just at the outer edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. Out of pure laziness, I set up my stops just based on the confirmation candle. And as it turns out, that is much a much better way to go about it.
Of the 60 purely losing trades, only 9 of them(15%) would go on to be winners with stops on the 2-candle formation. Certainly not enough to justify the extra loss and/or reduced profits you are exposing yourself to in every single other trade by setting a wider SL.
Oddly, in every single scenario where the wider stop did save the trade, it ended up going all the way to the -161.8% profit level. Still, not nearly worth it.
As I've said many times now, I'm really not qualified to be doing an analysis like this. This section in particular.
Looking at shared currency among the pairs traded, 74 of the trades are correlated. Quite a large group, but it makes sense considering the sort of moves we're looking for with this system.
This means you are opening yourself up to more risk if you were to trade on every signal since you are technically trading with the same underlying sentiment on each different pair. For example, GBP/USD and AUD/USD moving together almost certainly means it's due to USD moving both pairs, rather than GBP and AUD both moving the same size and direction coincidentally at the same time. So if you were to trade both signals, you would very likely win or lose both trades - meaning you are actually risking double what you'd normally risk(unless you halve both positions which can be a good option, and is discussed in ParallaxFX's posts and in various other places that go over pair correlation. I won't go into detail about those strategies here).
Interestingly though, 17 of those apparently correlated trades ended up with different wins/losses.
Also, looking only at trades that were correlated, winrate is 83%/70%/55% (for the three TP levels).
Does this give some indication that the same signal on multiple pairs means the signal is stronger? That there's some strong underlying sentiment driving it? Or is it just a matter of too small a sample size? The winrate isn't really much higher than the overall winrates, so that makes me doubt it is statistically significant.
One more funny tidbit: EUCAD netted the lowest overall winrate: 30% to even the -61.8% TP level on 10 trades. Seems like that is just a coincidence and not enough data, but dang that's a sucky losing streak. EDIT:
WOW I spent some time removing correlated trades manually and it changed the results quite a bit. Some thoughts on this below the results. These numbers also include the other "What I will trade" filters. I added a new worksheet to my data to show what I ended up picking.
- Total Trades: 75
- Raw Winrates:
- TP at -61.8%: 84.00%
- TP at -100%: 73.33%
- TP at -161.8%: 60.00%
- Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 53.33%
- Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 53.33% (yes, oddly the exact same winrate. but different trades/profits)
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
- TP at -61.8%: 18.13%
- TP at -100%: 26.20%
- TP at -161.8%: 34.01%
- Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 19.20%
- Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 17.29%
To do this, I removed correlated trades - typically by choosing those whose spread had a lower % of the trade width since that's objective and something I can see ahead of time. Obviously I'd like to only keep the winning trades, but I won't know that during the trade. This did reduce the overall sample size down to a level that I wouldn't otherwise consider to be big enough, but since the results are generally consistent with the overall dataset, I'm not going to worry about it too much.
I may also use more discretionary methods(support/resistance, quality of indecision/confirmation candles, news/sentiment for the pairs involved, etc) to filter out correlated trades in the future. But as I've said before I'm going for a pretty mechanical system.
This brought the 3 TP levels and even the breakeven strategies much closer together in overall profit. It muted the profit from the high R:R strategies and boosted the profit from the low R:R strategies. This tells me pair correlation was skewing my data quite a bit, so I'm glad I dug in a little deeper. Fortunately my original conclusion to use the -161.8 TP level with static stops is still the winner by a good bit, so it doesn't end up changing my actions.
There were a few times where MANY (6-8) correlated pairs all came up at the same time, so it'd be a crapshoot to an extent. And the data showed this - often then won/lost together, but sometimes they did not. As an arbitrary rule, the more correlations, the more trades I did end up taking(and thus risking). For example if there were 3-5 correlations, I might take the 2 "best" trades given my criteria above. 5+ setups and I might take the best 3 trades, even if the pairs are somewhat correlated.
I have no true data to back this up, but to illustrate using one example: if AUD/JPY, AUD/USD, CAD/JPY, USD/CAD all set up at the same time (as they did, along with a few other pairs on 6/19/20 9:00 AM), can you really say that those are all the same underlying movement? There are correlations between the different correlations, and trying to filter for that seems rough. Although maybe this is a known thing, I'm still pretty green to Forex - someone please enlighten me if so! I might have to look into this more statistically, but it would be pretty complex to analyze quantitatively, so for now I'm going with my gut and just taking a few of the "best" trades out of the handful.
Overall, I'm really glad I went further on this. The boosting of the B/E strategies makes me trust my calculations on those more since they aren't so far from the passive management like they were with the raw data, and that really had me wondering what I did wrong.
What I will trade
Putting all this together, I am going to attempt to trade the following(demo for a bit to make sure I have the hang of it, then for keeps):
- "System Details" I described above.
- TP at -161.8%
- Static SL at opposite side of confirmation candle - I won't move stops up to breakeven.
- Trade only 7am-11am and 4pm-11pm signals.
- Nothing where spread is more than 25% of trade width.
Looking at the data for these rules, test results are:
- Winrate: 58.19%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
I'll be sure to let everyone know how it goes!
Other Technical Details
- ATR is only slightly elevated in this date range from historical levels, so this should fairly closely represent reality even after the COVID volatility leaves the scalpers sad and alone.
- The sample size is much too small for anything really meaningful when you slice by hour or pair. I wasn't particularly looking to test a specific pair here - just the system overall as if you were going to trade it on all pairs with a reasonable spread.
Raw Data Here's the spreadsheet for anyone that'd like it.
(EDIT: Updated some of the setups from the last few days that have fully played out now. I also noticed a few typos, but nothing major that would change the overall outcomes. Regardless, I am currently reviewing every trade to ensure they are accurate.UPDATE: Finally all done. Very few corrections, no change to results.)
I have some explanatory notes below to help everyone else understand the spiraled labyrinth of a mind that put the spreadsheet together.
- I'm on the East Coast in the US, so the timestamps are Eastern time.
- Time stamp is from the confirmation candle, not the indecision candle. So 7am would mean the indecision candle was 6:00-6:59 and the confirmation candle is 7:00-7:59 and you'd put in your order at 8:00.
- I found a couple AM/PM typos as I was reviewing the data, so let me know if a trade doesn't make sense and I'll correct it.
Insanely detailed spreadsheet notes
For you real nerds out there. Here's an explanation of what each column means:
- Pair - duh
- Date/Time - Eastern time, confirmation candle as stated above
- Win to -61.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -61.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
- Win to -100%? - whether the trade made it to the -100% TP level before it hit the original SL.
- Win to -161.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -161.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
- Retracement level between -61.8% and -100% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -61.8%, but before hitting -100%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -61.8% to -100%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
- Retracement level between -100% and -161.8% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -100%, but before hitting -161.8%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -100% to -161.8%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
- Trade Width(Pips) - the size of the confirmation candle, and thus the "width" of your trade on which to determine position size, draw fib levels, etc.
- Loser saved by 2 candle stop? - for all losing trades, whether or not the 2-candle stop loss would have saved the trade and how far it ended up getting if so. "No" means it didn't save it, N/A means it wasn't a losing trade so it's not relevant.
- Spread(ThinkorSwim) - these are typical spreads for these pairs on ToS.
- Spread % of Width - How big is the spread compared to the trade width? Not used in any calculations, but interesting nonetheless.
- True Risk(Trade Width + Spread) - I set my SL at the opposite side of the confirmation candle knowing that I'm actually exposing myself to slightly more risk because of the spread(stop order = market order when submitted, so you pay the spread). So this tells you how many pips you are actually risking despite the Trade Width. I prefer this over setting the stop inside from the edge of the candle because some pairs have a wide spread that would mess with the system overall. But also many, many of these trades retraced very nearly to the edge of the confirmation candle, before ending up nicely profitable. If you keep your risk per trade at 1%, you're talking a true risk of, at most, 1.25% (in worst-case scenarios with the spread being 25% of the trade width as I am going with above).
- Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -61.8% - not going to go into huge detail, see the spreadsheet for calculations if you want. But, in a nutshell, if the trade was a win to 61.8%, it returns a positive # based on 61.8% of the trade width, minus the spread. Otherwise, it returns the True Risk as a negative. Both normalized to the 1% risk you started with.
- Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100% - same as the last, but 100% of Trade Width.
- Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -161.8% - same as the last, but 161.8% of Trade Width.
- Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100%, and move SL to breakeven at 61.8% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then full TP at 100%.
- Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread take off half of position at -61.8%, move SL to breakeven, TP 100% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you took of half the position and moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then TP the remaining half at 100%.
- Overall Growth(-161.8% TP, 1% Risk) - pretty straightforward. Assuming you risked 1% on each trade, what the overall growth level would be chronologically(spreadsheet is sorted by date).
Based on the reasonable rules I discovered in this backtest:
- Date range: 6/11-7/3
- Winrate: 58.19%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
Demo Trading Results
Since this post, I started demo trading this system assuming a 5k capital base and risking ~1% per trade. I've added the details to my spreadsheet for anyone interested. The results are pretty similar to the backtest when you consider real-life conditions/timing are a bit different. I missed some trades due to life(work, out of the house, etc), so that brought my total # of trades and thus overall profit down, but the winrate is nearly identical. I also closed a few trades early due to various reasons(not liking the price action, seeing support/resistance emerge, etc).
A quick note is that TD's paper trade system fills at the mid price for both stop and limit orders, so I had to subtract the spread from the raw trade values to get the true profit/loss amount for each trade.
I'm heading out of town next week, then after that it'll be time to take this sucker live!
- 86 Trades
- Date range: 7/9-7/30
- Winrate: 52.32%
- Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 20.73%
- Starting Balance: $5,000
- Ending Balance: $6,036.51
Live Trading Results
I started live-trading this system on 8/10, and almost immediately had a string of losses much longer than either my backtest or demo period. Murphy's law huh? Anyways, that has me spooked so I'm doing a longer backtest before I start risking more real money. It's going to take me a little while due to the volume of trades, but I'll likely make a new post once I feel comfortable with that and start live trading again.
Hi all, I found I am Asperger some weeks ago, explain that at the end, and want to find other cases like me, or opinions about these gifts and Asperger.
But, does any of you see Asperger Syndrome as a wonderful think like I do? I always loved to be who I am, and now I found that probably all the "gifts" I have come from Asperger Syndrome.
One of them, I really want to know if it's related to Asperger, is "super strength", and would like to know if any of you aspies like me have also an abnormal physical strength.
Here you'll see what I am physically capable of, without any training at the time, 5'11'' tall by 140lb bodyweight (body mass index of 19/20): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zuabvEjcdQ
I found this when watching Stan Lee Superhumans, I decided to imitate and noticed I could do those things, roll frying pans, bend horseshoes, etc.
Other physical characteristics:
- No Cold - I don't feel cold in my country, have tried to be some hours at the snow (below 0ºC or below 30 Farenheit), use just a tshirt the entire year even near 0ºC and below heavy rain and with fog, and dropping water from my clothes, I can feel the weather is colder, but doesn't affect me or give me pain, or something (correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this can relate to pain tolerance as an autistic characteristic);
- Never Get Sick - Even being at the rain, with 0ºC I never get a cold, etc;
- Pain Tolerance - Have bent (have it in video) a St. Croix 2 horseshoe barehanded the first time I've tried it, heart and paperclip shape (think it's an autistic trait sometimes also);
- Hyper sensitivity to light (but see very well at dark and love to be like this);
- Hyper sensitivity to sounds (hear very well, but seem deaf while in shoppings because of the noise);
- Can be the entire day without eating or drinking and even carrying heavy weights at night without getting weak;
Psycologically (sorry about my English) it was always great:
- I'm a self-taught polymath, learn everything very fast, start computer programming as a child, created softwares, freewares, developing now a C++ 2D game engine, developed mechanical trading systems, one of them gave 19,000% profit in Forex in 3 years, created new statistical and math formulas, wrote ebooks teaching how to invest, in my country, created successful websites, and teams to manage them, etc;
- Done lots of jobs, system administrator and software developer both in the biggest IT companies in my country, done also as electronics, trading, banking, consulting, etc (liked to try new things), but only did 12 years on school didn't want to go to universities;
- Can do the tests neuro-typical(or all?) people say that it's not possible to do, even wrote 2 different sentences, in 2 keyboards, on hand per keyboard, at the same time, while looking at a person talking to her at the same time (3 different things);
- My motor skills are (in my point of view) perfect for me, even done skateboarding tricks that only Rodney Mullen from US would be able to do at that time, like "shove-it 180 to late underkick-flip 360", etc;
- Tried arts, on my first day with a synthesizer, created several musics without ever having learned how to play, it's like I was already born knowing how to play. Example of first tries: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWE0vUWAHEI&index=2&list=PLswCft9xAHt9AAf81r1odbyMzsx-220dI&t=0s
Or slow ones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q_Yfy0SA-k&index=5&list=PLswCft9xAHt9AAf81r1odbyMzsx-220dI&t=0s
On the first two weeks created several and then stopped.
- For one month I painted in soft pastels and also drawn in carbon, and made photo realitic drawings of people's faces, did some cool paintings also. I've read Music is like Mathematics, but paintings?
- Studied several areas, and keep thinking some geniuses were sometimes dumb, like Einstein is a genius and I have the upmost respect for him, but in my point of view we can never reach a TEO with Time because Time doesn't exist, it's an abstract concept we use objectively, Space isn't mixed with Time, I think several things Hawking said are plain stupid, I don't agree with super string theory, M theory, etc, and I could be the one wrong anyway, but I always strangely never considered these geniuses's theories like, bullet-proof theories, while everybody does. Like I probably have too much self-confidence. But Time doesn't exist anyway lol.
- Memory - Remember the most incredible things from my past like if it were videos, from 40 years ago, including sounds, smells, etc.
- Ageing - People say I look a lot younger, I'm 40-43 at the videos (is this a trait?).
Well, I don't know how to explain, but whatever I try to do I always was able to learn quickly and do well or it seemed (like in arts) that I was already born knowing, not sure how. So I always thought it was born with me, in my genes but didn't know how.
Some weeks ago I found some hidden papers from my mother, from 1977-1981 when I was 2 to 6 years old, saying I was autistic, I didn't talk, I had pendular motions, etc. I was amazed, it was my name that was there, because I felt always the smarted guy in my schools, although I never studied and had an average of only 14/20, because I didn't care, but to see that, saying I couldn't speak well, didn't want to speak, etc, was strange to me.
At that time, in my country, a child was considered mentally retarded when autistic, or else, a normal child. So my mother refused to accept I was autistic and put me into school and my doctor approved because he believed I could adapt. And I didn't. I've done some asperger tests some weeks ago, and noticed I was asperger, and had a friend psychiatric doctor confirm it to me. From 32 to 40 on the regular tests, still exibit 9 to 11 of the 14 autistic traits that are in some papers, etc.
But nobody ever noticed that in my, I don't have anything visible, just being called eccentric, sometimes being caught with 2 hands in the air imagining stuff (like in the movie Aviator), used the same equal clothes everyday (black), ate the same food 5 years everyday (because I don't like to cook haha vegan raw food was quicker), used just the same spoon and fork and knife to eat, walk in mathematical patterns in the street (fibonacci, etc), notice car plates all the time, like to be alone, don't like people to touch me, love to see water flowing, am always spinning pens in my hand, very distracted (I thought I just had ADHD because I give positive on those tests), but it was strange how I could program 10 hours in a row without stopping, like a machine, very quickly, etc, etc (people call it being in "the zone" in computer programming).
I mean, I knew I was different but didn't know why. When I found I was asperger, everything made sense, even why I sometimes didn't understand why people are so sensitive to some stupid words and sentences and consider me insensitive sometimes or rude. But I like being like this, don't want to change, I'm not rude, but I'm now a very sensitive guy to human things anyway, just to animals (I'm an ethical vegan).
My friend told me that my mind compensated (I don't know my IQ I just know it's a lot higher than the limit they had at the tests they gave me at the time, I've done everything well and well before time and never wanted to know, I feel it's irrelevant), and it made me have no bad traits.
I even eliminated the Obsessive Compulsive Disorder I had, nowadays I just walk in patterns but I like it, it's like a game. He says I just have nowadays what I can't remove, what my mind can't correct, which is the distraction, the not understanding why people is so sensitive to some things, not having the will to be with friends often, etc. Some years ago (3/4) I read that not looking people on the eyes was a weak trait (on job interviews) so I practiced it and now can be 1 minute or more looking someone in the eyes, don't like it but got used to it. And over-think things, get obsessed to find answers, routines, using equal clothes, etc. But all cool things, nothing that I consider bad.
But I can make friends, I can talk in the stage in front of 1000 persons, I've gone to the tv, I can make conversation with strangers and be friends, I can always guess who have the fake smiles on photo tests, I can recognize emotions (although sometimes when distracted or furious I forget that and even had 2 persons crying with things I said, unintentionally). My friend said my mind probably compensated that and I learned how to identify emotions and fake smiles, etc, artificially, and now I don't know it's artificially because I didn't try to learn intentionally. So probably I learned that throughout life.
So basically, it's like I just had left the cool things, that don't affect my life much. And I consider them like "super powers", I know this seems stupid, but that's how I feel, and love to have these traits. I say "don't affect my life much" because one girlfriend in 2009 stopped walking when talking to me, and when I noticed and turned back she was like 15 meters from me furious that I didn't listen to her.
Anyway, I see Asperger as the source of all these gifts I have, physically and mentally. I even think that above peak human performance strength can be also a rare trait from autism. Da Vinci had it, not only me! Because people said I looked like da vinci for being a polymath but I said "No, I can bend steel bars with my hands!" but then I found Da Vinci had an abnormal strength, was asperger, and could bend horseshoes with his hands also!
So I even created a video in English (terribly spoken though): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy0K4UvVOo4
To try to convince other oldtime strongmen to do the asperger tests, because if I found more than 1% of aspergers in steel benders/oldtime strongmen, like 10%, 20%, I could statistically prove something. And I bet several of them are as I now recognize their behaviours as typical aspergers. But they don't want to answer it, maybe they are afraid of admiting or knowing, some seems to be for other reasons (believing other things).
So, does any of you have an abnormal strength also? Is there any study that related strength and aspergers? And do any of you think of asperger syndrome / austism like a source of "super powers"? I would like to have your opinions on this.
Sorry for my terrible English I've written this in a few minutes, and I'm Portuguese.
But I really want to find out if are there other cases like me, that moved from a (severe?) autistic child (or maybe just autistic? not even know as I don't have more papers from that time, just found 2), to a kind of "borderline" aspie like me. I'm not sure if I can be considered "borderline" because I have 9 or 11 from the 14 general autistic traits, rate 32-40 on the regular basic tests, and others also high. Although on the empathy tests I have usually 20 or higher, not below (above 30 seems to be the typical).
But as I love to be who I am and can do whatever I want, make friends (just don't like to be with them all the time or feel the need to), etc, I consider myself a "borderline" aspie, I was a much more severe case in my childhood, took 2 years in the primary school just to adapt my teacher was great, never went to special schools.
I consider myself a borderline aspie (ignoring test results) because I don't have "clumsiness", read people's faces, predict human behaviour well, can manipulate people, read fake smiles, use and abuse of sarcasm and irony (although I think some stuff people think it's funny is not funny at all anyway), etc. Am I a "borderline" aspie for this, or with all my traits a regular aspie but learned to appear "borderline"?
Anyway I would like to know if there are cases here like me, and that think being asperger is a gift (or source of gifts), and specially if are there very strong aspergers, I need to prove to myself that there is a link between autism and "super strength".
Can anyone tell me something about the Da Vinci - Asperger - Super Strength connection? Am I being crazy?
Are there kinesiologists, or psychiatric doctors focused on Aspergers that could study this? I would gladly allow some studies like D.R. has done in Stan Lee Superhumans, if this could help us learn more about Autism.
Thanks! Sorry for writting too much, I can't write few words. And thank your help in advance.
In the Fibonacci sequence of numbers, after 0 and 1, each number is the sum of the two prior numbers. In the context of trading, the numbers used in Fibonacci retracements are not numbers in ... Fibonacci Retracement Lines are a used as a predictive technical indicator in forex and CFD trading. Learn to use Fibonacci to locate potential retracement points, swing highs and swing lows to adjust your trading strategy. From the Fibonacci Sequence you get a series of ratios, and it is these ratios that are important to forex traders. The most important Fibonacci ratio is 61.8% – referred to as the “golden ratio” or “golden mean” simply because it tends to be the most reliable retracement ratio.; The 61.8% ratio is calculated by dividing any number in the sequence by the number that immediately ... Risk Warning: Trading Forex, Futures, and Options can lead to large potential rewards, but also to very large potential risks. The high degree of leverage can work against you as well as for you. We recommend low leverage when trading Forex or other derivative products. You must be aware of the risks of investing in forex, futures, and options and be willing to accept them in order to trade in ... For those who want to get even deeper into using the Fibonacci number series in technical analysis tools and the Elliott Wave Theory, I recommend these best Fibonacci trading books: Robert Fischer Fibonacci Sequence: Applications and Strategies for Traders. Carolyn Boroden Fibonacci Trading: How to Master the Time and Price Advantage. How to use Fibonacci ratios in Forex trading. Traders know that prices never rise in a straight line. Prices tend to rally or decline, then retrace, and then continue in the direction of the previous trend. By using Fibonacci ratios, you can measure a wave (a rally or a decline) and then anticipate where the price might retrace when it pulls back. The Fibonacci ratios are the key levels where ... Forex trading with Fibonacci method. Mini-lesson on how to use Fibonacci: HOME FIBONACCI FAN CALCULATE FIBONACCI LEVELS FIBONACCI CALCULATOR Forex Trading Strategies Forex Market Hours Forex Tips, Forex advice Forex Trend Lines Fibonacci method in Forex Forex Fundamental Analysis Forex Money Management Forex Trading Systems. Currency Forecasts. How to calculate Fibonacci retracement ...
How to use Fibonacci numbers to trade stocks, futures, & forex. fibonacci forex formula fibonacci formula forex trading fibonacci for forex fibonacci for forex trading gcm forex fibonacci forex fibonacci kullanımı forex fibonacci nasıl kullanılır ... This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Get started with Ninjatrader for FREE: https://ninjatrader.com/GetStarted Fibonacci is a popular technical trading methodology based on a number sequence. Fo... How to Trade Fibonacci Retracements - Duration: 8:46. Trading 212 1,054,478 views. 8:46. ... 95% Winning Forex Trading Formula - Beat The Market Maker📈 - Duration: 37:53. TRADE ATS 771,621 ... #Best_Forex_Fibonacci_Trading_Strategy #Junet_ForexBD Forex 100% No Loss Strategy https: ... 95% Winning Forex Trading Formula - Beat The Market Maker📈 - Duration: 37:53. TRADE ATS 707,963 ... 95% Winning Forex Trading Formula ... Learn the SECRET to Trading Fibonacci Retracements - Duration: 21:56. Trade Empowered 1,574,889 views. 21:56. Why Trading Forex is so Difficult - Randomness ...