Bet Angel - Automation : Tracking the lowest and highest LTO

Advanced automation available in Guardian - Chat with others and share files here.
Post Reply
firlandsfarm
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:32 am

Hi all, I've tried and failed and looked and can't find so looking for a little help please … does anyone know of a ruleset for Automation or Servant that will identify when any runner hits a new low or high for LTO? My problem with trying to Automate is that to cycle through all runners and ID the first Highest and first Lowest of each runner is easy, just set the runner's Signal when done. And to test for subsequent Highs and Lows by checking against the previous High/Low is also easy but I can't see how to repeat cycling through the field more than once. It just repeats for the first runner. :( I'm sure there is a Signal/Stored Value process that can achieve this but I just can't see it. As a work around for the time being I have a separate rule for each runner (40 rules!). All thoughts gratefully received. :)

User avatar
jimibt
Posts: 2393
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:42 pm

Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:38 am

firlandsfarm wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:32 am
Hi all, I've tried and failed and looked and can't find so looking for a little help please … does anyone know of a ruleset for Automation or Servant that will identify when any runner hits a new low or high for LTO? My problem with trying to Automate is that to cycle through all runners and ID the first Highest and first Lowest of each runner is easy, just set the runner's Signal when done. And to test for subsequent Highs and Lows by checking against the previous High/Low is also easy but I can't see how to repeat cycling through the field more than once. It just repeats for the first runner. :( I'm sure there is a Signal/Stored Value process that can achieve this but I just can't see it. As a work around for the time being I have a separate rule for each runner (40 rules!). All thoughts gratefully received. :)
hi there... yeah, this is a common problem but with a relatively easy solution (depending!!). all you need to do is to check that the Signal has not been set of that runner (i.e. the Signal that you are setting). doing this effectively marks un Signalled runners and skips thro each runner until all are processed. likewise, if you are setting strored values, you can ADD a signal to your rule that FLAGS the runner as having been pre-processed in exactly the same manner.

hope this makes sense.

User avatar
Dallas
Posts: 14489
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:57 pm
Contact:

Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:21 pm

Not sure if this helps
viewtopic.php?f=56&t=19253

firlandsfarm
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:08 pm

jimibt wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:38 am
… all you need to do is to check that the Signal has not been set of that runner (i.e. the Signal that you are setting). doing this effectively marks un Signalled runners and skips thro each runner until all are processed. likewise, if you are setting strored values, you can ADD a signal to your rule that FLAGS the runner as having been pre-processed in exactly the same manner.

hope this makes sense.
Hi jimibt and thanks for your response. Yes, I often use that process and use it in this ruleset to give initial SV's to each runner's High and Low traded prices when the ruleset is activated. The problem then is how to keep a rule cycling through all runners in the future. It doesn't go to the second runner until the conditions for the first runner are met and that runner's Signal is set. That process requires a more "that action has been done now move to the next one" requirement whereas I'm looking for a "OK, those conditions are not met so let's try the next runner" approach. The response I'm getting is "If the first runner never trades outside it's High/Low range it never moves past that runner". So I'm looking for a way to flag "OK, checked that one, nothing doing, flag it and move to the next". I have something else I will try and read Dallas's link … Thanks Dallas.

firlandsfarm
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am

Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:17 pm

Dallas wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:21 pm
Not sure if this helps
viewtopic.php?f=56&t=19253
Hi Dallas, yes I am using a specific rule per selection at the moment as a work around (I say that because I was wondering if it is possible to achieve the same using a single looping rule instead of 40 or more selections (Golf!)). :) I do like the "start" and "stop" approach, that makes the 40+ selections much easier to handle. As I said in my response to jimibt I have another thought and will also try that and let you know if it works.

Post Reply

Return to “Bet Angel - Automation”

  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests