Quote from amitman:
I for myself use 1:1 R:R ratio to determine my exits (meaning my target will be the same as my stop). Why do I do it?
Two reasons:
I can backtest it and see that it has positive expectency.
It fits my trading style.
That being said, if you have any good ideas or thought about how to squueze more of a trade, I'd be very happy to read them.
I think your approach is excellent. The most frustrated traders I've encountered are those who don't have a specific plan of some sort. Instead they try to outsmart (or avoid developing) a simple plan and end up with far less than if they'd stick with a plan based on positive expectancy.
I've posted this link many times and I read this little story often to keep my big brain from micro-managing a simple and effective plan:
http://www.cornixtrading.com/2012/07/rats-vs-yale-students-randomness-psychology/
I just posted on another thread that my intraday price action analysis over time has shown that fixed targets produce a superior outcome for those who trade varying market conditions (as opposed to those who only are trying to catch a strong trend).
If you're adept at identifying a well-defined trend, you may want to run a spreadsheet comparison of your fixed target method to some flexible target methods to see if an adjustment can be made to "squeeze more out".
A couple flexible target methods I use are:
1) N ticks beyond the last new high/low (N might be based on the number of ticks the last breakout ran, or on a channel line drawn parallel to the main trend line)
2) Adjusting a trailing stop at the close of each 1-min bar

