26th May 2012, 10:26 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 268
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lord Greystoke
Mattio,
Would the general conclusion be that we don't necessarily get 'value' with unders, but they win up to 3x more often(than overs) due to positive factors we are unaware of, so we have a better chance of a POT over the long run?
This would make price fluctuations the ultimate filter to be applied?
LG
|
LG, I can only speak from my experience and the testing I am currently doing so I don't want to draw any general conclusions but relative to what I am doing I would say yes. I am still to incorporate price movements as a filter.
Cheers,
Mat. |