SL to be or not to be - page 5

New comment
 

A stop loss is a price level at which, after opening a position, I tell myself: If I had known it was going to be like this, I would not have opened it. In other words, it is a situation where the signal to open a position is destroyed after opening it. Example: I trade a 1-2-3 pattern. I buy, but the price goes below level 1 after breaching level 2. The signal is destroyed and a stop-loss is triggered. Take Profit does not depend on Stop Loss. There may be no take profit at all.

Stop Loss may not be used at all, following the "brakes were invented by cowards" principle. In this case it is replaced by a stop out or something else.

If you enter the market and set some ratio of SL to TP, then there are nuances, ignoring which can be painful.

I enter without looking on the principle of red/black at roulette. You have to play (not work in this case, but play) on the principles of the same roulette. SL=TP and no nails. You can screw in a martin, if you have plenty of money, no ideas, and you really want to. I did so on business trips, when I had to pass the time at the roulette, and I'm to this case invariant, and more money than the natives, roulette settings are not designed for me.

And then there's the most subtle thing. People here are voicing that the more TP/SL, the thicker the partisans. Disappointingly, this is not at all true, and often quite the opposite.

 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
Yeah, I read the options and remember my earlier arguments.
About locks, on netting mt5 it's loss taking. To handle lots is or mastery of the market Or a silly excuse for self-repair.
Regarding the syl is a deal at a worse price, it is appropriate only in the case of levels similar to the last high or last low. But in the case of some systems this is just a protection from a more serious fixation of losses.
As for the virtual one, it is appropriate only in case of outright fraudulent kitchens, well, there is no reason for a dealer to draw studs for you personally.

I knew how to do it about 4 years ago.

but in fact it was only the beginning ...

---

as for the stops, i'll put it this way, since i couldn't do it any other way....

there shouldn't be any stops because they ruin a good strategy.

if there's a strategy that doesn't need a stop, then don't put one

there is no such strategy, then there is no way without stops

whether they are virtual or visible

rarely do people put stops smaller than a takeaway, more often than not.

but then they refuse in fury as any of these options start to trigger more often than a takeaway ....

;)

 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
Wait a minute, if I know that, according to the theorem, the series of losses in my trading system may be equal to 30 losses in a row, then I need to do the calculation so that after 30 losses I can open another trade. That's if it's aggressive.
And conservatively, my 30 losses should not exceed 5% loss.

After 30 losses one profit and then 30 losses again)))

Does your theorist allow for this?

 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
Wait a minute, if I know that, according to the theorem, the series of losses in my trading system may result in 30 consecutive losses, then I need to calculate how after 30 losses I can open a position. This is if you are aggressive.
And conservatively, my 30 losses should be no more than 5%.

Actually, that's a bit of a bummer.

Don't take a system like that into circulation.

 
Sergey Chalyshev:

After 30 losses, one profit and 30 losses again ))))

Does your theorist allow for this?

Of course such a case is quite probable, but it is out of the ordinary. In this case it is not too shameful to lose, because according to the same theorem there must be a series of the opposite direction.
 
Heads should be traded, not crooked hands...
 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
Yeah, I read the options and remember my earlier arguments.
As for locks, on netting mt5 it is loss taking. To handle locks is either mastery of the market or a silly excuse for self-abasement.
Regarding the fact that a SL is a deal at a worse price, it is relevant only in the case of levels similar to the last high or last low. But in the case of some systems this is just a protection against more serious fixation of losses.
As for the virtual one, it is appropriate only for the fraudulent ones, because there is no need for DTs to draw steeples for you personally.

You should think about what may happen to a stop-loss and take-profit when you change the dates (on swaps). When the spread jumps and there is a gap. Oops

And it's not in the kitchen - it's in anyone and everyone.

Same picture with a "floating" spread, only the scale is smaller.

 
Renat Akhtyamov:

It's actually kind of a tantrum.

You shouldn't take such a system into circulation.

And you take your system and apply it to 28 currency pairs, and then see what kind of series of losses and profits occur.
For a single currency pair such a series is a super rare event.
 
Anatolii Zainchkovskii:
Of course, such a case is quite probable, but it is out of the question. In such variant it is not a pity and to merge, for further on the same theorist should be a series of opposite direction.

Probability theory owes nothing to anyone. Especially when formalising predominantly deterministic processes.

 
Maxim Kuznetsov:

Think about what can happen to stop-loss and take-profit when the dates change (on swaps). When the spread jumps and gaps appear. Oops

And it's not in the kitchen - it's in anyone and everyone.

Same picture with a "floating" spread, only the scale is smaller.

If your system draws half of the spread, then yes, spread widening at night and on the news is detrimental. But if you have 30-80pp stops then I think these expansions and Hera are just excuses.
123456789101112
New comment