Can you prove it? And what kind of system and its trading style (timeframe etc.) do you mean?
Last edited:
Our 400,000 Trade Test Proves Using Stops Is Not Very Bright
- Thread starter marketsurfer
- Start date
What does the entry have to do with the stop, if any?
If there were no losers, then nobody would make any profit...
That's correct. I am so happy that there are losers
.The better the entry, the less you will need a stop. Simple logic,but very important.
Exactly, because the definition of a stop is: the place where the profits should be protected maximal while reducing the losses to the minimum.
But that would mean that you can correctly forecast the path of the trade...
How is your success rate in predicting the direction of the trade? And over which timeframe-lengths does it work best?
Last edited:
And what do you do immediately after entry when the trade runs against you?
You get stopped out... multiple times makes a big sum...
But I get your point: a good planning for the entry point is a good thing to do, right.
Last edited:
Knowing the definition is important. Next challenge is trying to apply it as good as possible.
So first you need the knowledge to know what to do, and next the knowledge to do it.
I am happy with my success rate because at the start is was a "suck"sesrate.
And what do you do immediately after entry when the trade runs against you?
You get stopped out... multiple times makes a big sum...
But I get your point: a good planning for the entry point is a good thing to do, right.
No, getting stopped out all the time means your system entries are not good.
If you have good entries you have more possibilities to try for free as you might be able to close a bad trade before losing money.