The work that walter jennings and the others did on managing the potential risk of a trade was actually very fruitful, and most definitely a move in the right direction.
Based on Frosty's description of the bots trading process, and from my own observation I know that part of the process that bot uses when trading is to allow price action to bring it back into a profitable or less of a losing position whenever possible.
In a way, this is a good thing, because the financial markets trend approximately 30% of the time, but they trade back-and-forth 70% of the time.
As you can see, from that stat alone the bot has a good potential to become a profitable enterprise ... the thing is, on those days when it's trending, if the bot is on the wrong side of the market it's going to take a bath.
There are many ways to mitigate this problem, and protective stops is only one of them, but it is a good one when looked at from the perspective of being a FAIL SAFE type of mechanism.
Walter's formula (and the logic and proof behind it) was great, it really was. You might want to review it, make the max loss something like 80% of the largest adverse excursion of price action, and try it on the NQ, ES and YM as well as the ER, you might really have something going there.
But no stop loss on such a highly leveraged product as the ER, has a very low probability of ultimately proving to be successful, for all the reasons that a number of successful traders have mentioned in the last 5 or 10 pages of the thread.
Good trading,
Jimmy Jam
Based on Frosty's description of the bots trading process, and from my own observation I know that part of the process that bot uses when trading is to allow price action to bring it back into a profitable or less of a losing position whenever possible.
In a way, this is a good thing, because the financial markets trend approximately 30% of the time, but they trade back-and-forth 70% of the time.
As you can see, from that stat alone the bot has a good potential to become a profitable enterprise ... the thing is, on those days when it's trending, if the bot is on the wrong side of the market it's going to take a bath.
There are many ways to mitigate this problem, and protective stops is only one of them, but it is a good one when looked at from the perspective of being a FAIL SAFE type of mechanism.
Walter's formula (and the logic and proof behind it) was great, it really was. You might want to review it, make the max loss something like 80% of the largest adverse excursion of price action, and try it on the NQ, ES and YM as well as the ER, you might really have something going there.
But no stop loss on such a highly leveraged product as the ER, has a very low probability of ultimately proving to be successful, for all the reasons that a number of successful traders have mentioned in the last 5 or 10 pages of the thread.
Good trading,
Jimmy Jam
