Quote from Smart Money:
Thanks for the reply. I do get that you shouldn't add to a losing position...but I don't get why anyone would delay adding to a winner.
Lets say you were playing the ES, and you bought one contract at 1400, at 1401 it was looking good so you add another contract, and at 1402 things started turning sour so you sold.
So you earned 2 pts on one contract and 1 point on the second....for a total of 3 points. But you could have earned 4 from jumping in there from the beginning. The win was watered down.
And arguably, the second contract is riskier because you're buying in later in the run...there are less ticks to go before it reverses, right? So you're ramping up risk.
What am I missing?
SM
Quote from Smart Money:
Here's my 2 cents:
Don't trade unless you're pretty sure that you're going to make money. And then stay in it until you're pretty sure you're going to lose money. Maybe be more skittish about jumping out...first sign of trouble and you're out.
"Pretty sure" should be about 90% system, and 10% gut feel.
Why do I say this? Because you either have an edge or you don't. If you don't, no manipulation of the size of your bet is going to help you. And if you do have an edge, then why on earth wouldn't you want to get all the benefit of it?
IMHO, you should be all in when you get in and when you get out, get out. Manipulation of the odds comes from your system.
But last of all...play an amount that is right for the all in, all out, strategy.
You could come up with a cash handling strategy on a coin flip. Like with 50/50 odds, when you lose, double the next bet to get your money back. They look good on paper, but eventually, such strategies will end up blowing out your account because eventually you'll be in a position of betting half your funds to win back a little bit of money. The cash handling strategy can't help you because the win percentage isn't high enough...so find a system that wins more than 50% and then play it as often and as much as you can.
I'm open to hearing anyone refute my statement here. Explain to me how parsing a winning strategy makes sense or how you can parse a losing strategy to success through money management. Seriously, I'm open to hearing it. I do get that profitability is win percentage times return on a win vs. loss percentage times return on a loss (i.e, 30% of the time you double your money and 70% of the time you lose half....that is not what I'm talking about). I'm saying if you have a edge...say a situation wehre you'd make more money winning than losing, why would you want to water it down at any point? Sorry for the rant, and I hope I'm not hijacking here, but I'd really love an intelligent answer....it might help me be a better trader.
SM
The correct answers are -Quote from CheckM8t:
Knowing that once a daytrade is put on, there is roughtly a 50/50 chance of price moving in the right direction, and any trade can last from a few seconds to a few hours. I'm lookeing for some ideas on trade management, once my strategy signals an entry.
Has experience shown that entering a trade with the full position on at time of entry, (then lightening the position if the trade starts going against you and maintaining the full position if price moves in the right direction) is more effective than entering a trade with a partial position, then increasing size as price moves in the right direction?
All constuctive responses are appreciated.

Quote from Rationalize:
If the 50/50 problem is not solved, then all else is irrelevant .. "money management" or not.
No one wins a coin flip game.
Quote from oilfxpro:
Twice the profit target reduces hit rate to zero sum result.Go do some statistical analysis on historic data.
It is all about probabilities.
Quote from oilfxpro:
A 50/50 system days trading system can not make you money. , you need a 70% winners/30 % losers method to make you money
Quote from oilfxpro:
Those using 20 pip stops have higher % hit rates than 5 to 8 pips stop users based on Statistical data, in fact most of these tight stop strategies are less profitable than wide stop strategies, some of them become losers due to tight stops.
Quote from Smart Money:
Why do I say this? Because you either have an edge or you don't. If you don't, no manipulation of the size of your bet is going to help you. And if you do have an edge, then why on earth wouldn't you want to get all the benefit of it?
IMHO, you should be all in when you get in and when you get out, get out. Manipulation of the odds comes from your system.
I'm saying if you have a edge...say a situation wehre you'd make more money winning than losing, why would you want to water it down at any point?
Quote from austinp:
example: ten trades per day in CL, -20 cent initial stop seeking +100 cents profit objectives break down like this:
5 stopped at 0 cents
3 stopped at -20 cents each (-60 cents)
2 stopped at +100 cents each (+200 cents)
net result: 20% "win rate" and +$1,400 per contract on ten round turns
there's your statistical analysis from your own preferred trading symbol in today's current market environment![]()
Quote from oilfxpro:
I am making assumptions here.
CL is more volatile than euro/usd. I found 20 pip stops were much better than 8 pip stops on euro usd.Based on higher volatility of CL, 50 C stops may produce better results.The wider the stops , the less likely one is taken out by increased volatility.
Have you any statistical information on using 50c stops?
My estimate of 50 c stops trading on highly trending days is
4 wins +100
4 losses -50
2 b/e 0
200 profit
Using 20c stops would require perfect timing of entry.