As far as how to prevent that, should the macro look at the end of day line first, and if it does not meet or exceed the profit threshold, there were no winners for the day? Even if, at some point during the day, the threshold was exceeded?
No the macro should not look at the end of each day. But it does need look at the end of each array (so for instance) in row 898 this is a false positive because at the end of that event (row 907) is not above the required threshold, the event arrays can be found by looking in column A.
The macro is close and i love the output table. Will make graphing very easy.
Also in my example i have manually put the 1's in column L to stop the staking being the same as the continuous bank (column g). The macro would need to identify the row below the end of an event array which achieved the 2%, it would then need to insert 1's into column L down until there was a new day. For instance threshold is achieved in row 1083 (end of event array) where as it is not achieved at the end of the event array related to the row 898 win. So in this case the macro would be required to put 1s in L970:L973. If the macro can be made to do this, and the line :
is turned to Column K instead.
Then i believe the macro will achieve the goal. Just for your interest columns F-H is a continuous staking plan, easy for me to model via formulae, where as columns I-K (Affected by the 1's in column L) is a stop at x% (in this case 2%) staking plan.
Essentially the difficult thing to do with 300,000 rows of data is to identify the bank at the start of the day and then identify the array end which is above x% and insert 1's in column L.
I really do hope this makes sense?
Thanks so much
Alan
Bookmarks