otherwise "run" is what you let your profits doQuote from Buy1Sell2:
There is but one correct method of trading for the retail trader.
1. Keep losses small. (Never risk more than 2% of Total Liquid Net Worth on any one trade/idea.)
2. Let winners run using stops outside the noise.
3. Keep commissions small
4. Don't scale in or scale out.
![]()
Quote from oldtime:
you have it backwards
noise is a post on ET
run is what you do when it is posted
well, I think we all have had experience with our own version of "cut your losses short" it really only takes a calculator to figure out how much heat we can standQuote from logic_man:
True, there is a lot of noise here.
Anyway, the reason I asked is because without quantitative definitions of those subjective terms, the advice is basically meaningless and will be interpreted by each person differently.
I have an empirical answer to my own question and use it every day to do exactly what the OP suggested, I was just curious if he'd gone and done that as well.
Quote from oldtime:
well, I think we all have had experience with our own version of "cut your losses short" it really only takes a calculator to figure out how much heat we can stand
so what is your let profits run method?
I can tell you, the one thing I tried that really destroyed a good system was entering a trailing stop on winners
fixed stops weren't much better
the thing that really made it click was trading the account
new account high? get flat
well, that makes sense. After I take out a new account high, I figure it is normal to then give up 30% of the move, so that over time is probably about the same as using trailing stops on winners.Quote from logic_man:
Trailing stop is the correct answer, but the trick is in the way you figure out how to trail it (duh, right?). It's the best way to suck everything out of a move and to cut your losses short.
I measure the efficacy of my stops by how often the market stops me out then continues in the original direction, leaving me behind. I have also quantified what "leaving me behind" means, so that I don't go chasing the market on a false continuation. I can't even remember the last time I've truly been left behind like that, but it was some time last summer. The market will tell you when it's done and when any subsequent move will be a false breakout. Once you figure it out, it makes complete sense that that would be the place to put the stop.
Quote from logic_man:
True, there is a lot of noise here.
Anyway, the reason I asked is because without quantitative definitions of those subjective terms, the advice is basically meaningless and will be interpreted by each person differently.
I have an empirical answer to my own question and use it every day to do exactly what the OP suggested, I was just curious if he'd gone and done that as well.

if I like the trade, and take a 2% hit, and then put the same trade back on, does that count as observing rule #1?Quote from Buy1Sell2:
Everyone's perception of what noise is is different. The point is to define that yourself and stick to the 2% rule risking no more that 2% of TLNW on any one trade/idea. -- I have defined for myself what noise is to me. --Each person will have their own system, but there is but one correct method on how to trade that system. If it's a bad system, then these 4 tenets will lose less money.![]()
Quote from oldtime:
if I like the trade, and take a 2% hit, and then put the same trade back on, does that count as observing rule #1?

or once I get stopped out, I'm supposed to mope around the house blaming myself for what a fool I was, especially since now it finally starts to be moving my way, but, I don't want to violate any rules, so I guess I should just let that one go.Quote from oldtime:
if I like the trade, and take a 2% hit, and then put the same trade back on, does that count as observing rule #1?