RN,
This may sound simplistic (it may even be simplistic) but I have been viewing the setups I use primarily to define my entry, using a stop to enter and placing my "stop loss" (bad term but commonly used) at the point where price would tell me I was wrong.
You seem to be saying that if you can define the point where you would be wrong and like the markets' behavior you might enter immediately and consider the fact that defining your "out point" was enough to view it as a setup. I'm not so much concerned with the semantics but you do seem to be saying that the 5% of my trades I make this way are setup trades as well because they meet this single criteria.
Are there traders reading this that have entered fast moving markets with stops of 4 or 5 ticks knowing that it might take two or three entrees to get in for a ride -- if you get in at all?
Markets seem to be in re-occurring crisis mode. I do not want to be stuck in my mode if the markets are in another mode. The Ghosts' comments about being able to stay with the winners are always important but maybe more important now than ever before. My rhetoric matches his but unfortunately as I review my trades (particularly my most profitable trades) I am simply leaving way, way too much on the table.
Since we all run the risk of central bank intervention and other even more creative government interventions whipsawing our best trades and inflicting serious losses on a given day it is crucial to be making some of our trades pay off well enough to absorb the inevitable losses I think we will all face in coming months yet still have a healthy bottom line.
We are through the looking glass and a failure to recognize the "new reality" is dangerous. I know I need to change ... just not quite sure what that entails.
This may sound simplistic (it may even be simplistic) but I have been viewing the setups I use primarily to define my entry, using a stop to enter and placing my "stop loss" (bad term but commonly used) at the point where price would tell me I was wrong.
You seem to be saying that if you can define the point where you would be wrong and like the markets' behavior you might enter immediately and consider the fact that defining your "out point" was enough to view it as a setup. I'm not so much concerned with the semantics but you do seem to be saying that the 5% of my trades I make this way are setup trades as well because they meet this single criteria.
Are there traders reading this that have entered fast moving markets with stops of 4 or 5 ticks knowing that it might take two or three entrees to get in for a ride -- if you get in at all?
Markets seem to be in re-occurring crisis mode. I do not want to be stuck in my mode if the markets are in another mode. The Ghosts' comments about being able to stay with the winners are always important but maybe more important now than ever before. My rhetoric matches his but unfortunately as I review my trades (particularly my most profitable trades) I am simply leaving way, way too much on the table.
Since we all run the risk of central bank intervention and other even more creative government interventions whipsawing our best trades and inflicting serious losses on a given day it is crucial to be making some of our trades pay off well enough to absorb the inevitable losses I think we will all face in coming months yet still have a healthy bottom line.
We are through the looking glass and a failure to recognize the "new reality" is dangerous. I know I need to change ... just not quite sure what that entails.
Quote from Redneck trader:
Other than succinctly identifying where we would be wrong (and obviously exiting there) â what more does a sound set up require⦠reallyâ¦.[/b]
I would respond nothingâ¦
RN [/B]
When you are doing money you should hope that you will do more. If losing - just cut them, take your lose instead of it taking you 