Thanks for sharing with us, other methods/path of EA development.
As the saying goes "Different strokes for different folks"
Hence, likewise there are many paths to EA development and trading theories/strategies. And for healthy discussion here in FSB forum, let us share with one another our strengths, preferences, styles etc while in the process, let us refrain from putting other's down or use any condescending tone if they styles/methods don't suit our taste.
There is beauty in walking...just like Pradeep enjoys long walk (15km, boy that's very long). If all he cares is about getting from point A to point B. He could have jolly well drive and reached his destination in a couple of minutes. But why does he walk instead? Because he enjoy the process of walking.
Similarly, we could all just run our EA through Monte Carlo, multi markets, walk forward, backward etc. and "reached" our conclusion in a matter of minutes and seconds. But there are those, who prefer to walk through their EA in a demo account, to observe how the EA enter, exit and behave in different market situation. In the process of this walking, many insights gained beyond what Monte Carlo, walk forward, etc can ever offer. Such insights are precious, strengthens one's trading knowledge and skills. If people can't see the value or beauty behind these testing, it is a "waste" of time to them. And yes, for such people, please take Dave's advice seriously. Walking is too tedious for you, take a car and reached your destination faster but don't spoil the fun of those who love to walk (nor ridicule their passion for it).
Why I choose to walk?
Firstly, there come a point in time (sooner or later) whereby users of FSB have to faced this hard and rude fact, that "What we see (statistic), is not what we get (demo or real) results" always.
Haven't we read so many discussion from people who mentioned that their EA looks good in the FSB but did badly in demo/real?
Haven't we read that after optimizing, EA looks fantastic but again failed miserably in demo testing?
Haven't we read those EA churned out by Generator doesn't worked as well as they looked?
You see, there come a point for users to finally realised, what they see, isn't what they get. At this junction, 2 things/decisions can happened.
1. People get disillusioned by FSB and give it up and think it is not as powerful as it claims. Hence, when these people read reports of others having success in FSB, they either think it is a gimmick or plain lucky.
2. Another group of people, will learn to make the best use of FSB for it's strength and work to overcome FSB's limitations, these people will tap on the best of FSB can give and think it is heaven sent.
So to tell me to make my decision solely based on FSB's results and rely on Monte Carlo, etc to do the "thinking" for me, is to tell me to be in denial of the fact that "what we see, isn't what we get". Is to live in this "fantasy island" that FSB is the Total answer to my EA development (and don't look elsewhere) and I don't have to count on any other tools to help me in my decision making...no need to do my own EA analysis, no need to do my own observation, no need to test out my EA in demo (cos it is naive to do that) but jump straight into live account if I'm serious trader...seriously, I can't believe this is the advice given. Popov always say, trade safe, not trade live.
If I kept relying on Monte Carlo and walk forward etc to discard EA (if they don't pass Monte test, multi test) instead of observing them, I learnt nothing. Over the years, as I walk through with my EA, my trading skills and strategy is refined through the process. Monte Carlo can't "teach" me how to develop good EA. Can FSB teach me how to have these results (screen shot), look at my EA profit factor. Can FSB teach me to replicate such results? Can FSB search and find me EA with such performance? By the way, these good EA with excellent Profit factors looked badly in FSB's statistic and failed miserably in Monte Carlo and multi test, should I throw these EA away? (can you show me your EA profit factor performance that pass Monte carlo test, do they have better performance than these?)
I'm a big fan of FSB but I'm not a blind supporter who is oblivious (unaware) of FSB's short coming.
So I would appreciate if you share your style, preference and ideas/tips with due respect to others, exalting your preference without putting others down. Since you are good in using the other functions of FSB, go ahead and share your expertise with others...I believe many will benefit from your sharing and I too can learn from you.
Remember....Different strokes for different folks. One's man meat, another man's poison.