Thread: Point System to Distinguish High or Low Probability Operations?

Hello everyone, I wanted to ask if any of you have ever used a dot system in your operation to differentiate low probability operations from high probability operations. With a dot system I mean something like this: Operation 1 Let's imagine that the graph has just closed with a double ceiling. That double roof would be worth, to say something, 1 point. Then look at other indicators like the RSI and the price structure. The RSI is in overpurchase, so you add up 1 point more. Then you see that there is confluence with a structural zone: add up another point. That leaves you with a 3 point operation. Operation 2 You have a similar opportunity, but this time the RSI is not in overpurchase nor is there a clear support/resistance structure. That operation would be worth 1 point. Comparing the two, it is clear that the first one has more chance of success. Has anyone used such a system? Can you share examples or ideas? And if you never used a dot system, how do you filter the operations? Do you do it all by intuition? Thank you beforehand.

It is a good basis. I do not use a point system as such, but I take into account about 15 different variables before entering into a transaction. Not all apply, and sometimes even contradict each other. But I value them together according to my experience and my way of reading the market. I recommend this article for a similar perspective: http://www.eminiplayer.com/2009/06/l...ul-trader.html And I leave you a question to think: Not all filters or criteria have the same weight. How do you decide which ones really work in the market and which ones are noise?

So you don't use a point system as such, but you do use a sort of internal valuation, even if you don't use numbers. Your knowledge of the market and how you operate allows you to distinguish good operations from bad ones. I read the article and, summarizing, what I made clear is that that trader studied both the markets that came to "feel" where the price went and to see the setups naturally. It also says that if you don't know how to read the real market, it doesn't matter how many setups or indicators you use: they won't help you at all. That's what I understood. I may be wrong and have to read it back, but for now that was my impression. Thank you for sharing it.

Trading is probably pure probability. Your thing is that you find something in your historical charts that works 56% of the time. If you find that, bet on it. Again and again. That’s how you make money. And don’t forget this: the only way to win a million in Forex is to lose 9 million and then win 10.

I like the idea of using points, but don't get confused: adding numbers doesn't turn a mediocre operation into a good one. Such a system can help you filter, yes, but only if you know what you're valuing. Not everything is worth a point just because it sounds technical. For example, a double ceiling on a chart without context is not worth the same as one aligned with greater tendency, volume and weekly endurance. Not all "one" are the same, and if you don't understand that, your system will be a lottery disguised as logic.

The problem with this type of system is that people want to machine intuition. And that’s not always possible. It’s not that it’s wrong to have a guide, but many use it as an excuse not to think. If you’re going to score a setup, make sure you understand why you’re doing it. Because if you don’t know how those factors actually affect the price, it doesn’t matter if you give it 3 points or 300. It’s noise wrapped in Excel.

I also tried a point system years ago. The result? A nice file and zero consistency. Not because the system was bad, but because I was trying to turn something fluid like the market into something rigid. Over time I understood that there are days where a 2 points is better than a 5, and others where the opposite. The key is not in the amount of signals that align, but in the quality of the context that surrounds them.

If you're not able to operate without a checklist, maybe you're not ready for the real market yet. I'm not saying it's wrong to use one, but if you can't justify your operations without adding up numbers, you're operating on autopilot. The goal is not to create a trading system that tells you what to do, but one that teaches you to think. If you don't develop your own criteria, you'll end up trapped in alien systems that you don't understand.

I think it’s a great idea for beginners. It forces them to structure their analysis and stop going into “hearty.” In fact, I hope many will stop improvising and start rating their setups. Now, let’s not confuse method with absolute truth. If your point system makes you ignore a clear pattern just because it didn’t score 3/3, you might be ruling out brutal opportunities.

Of course I use a similar system, although I don’t call it that. I have a “mental ranking” for my setups. Some are type A (high probability).