Thread: Moving SL to BE is very wrong/noobish

I'm by no mean a professional trader or something. But I'm quite good in statistics and math because of my engineering profession.

Anyway I will describe to you moving SL to BE is quite awful and noobish in few straightforward words w/o utilizing complex math.

1-You open two lots , with both TP 30 pips. 1 hit TP, another you go SL to BE. The 2nd lot hit BE, no issue, you still got your 30 pips, right? WRONG!

Borrows exactly what you did: You'd 60 pips in your equity to get both lots, when you transferred SL to BE for 1 lot, it ONLY means you opened a random new trade with -30 SL, when it hits the SL in BE, you lose 30 pips out of YOUR money!!

Two - Moving SL to BE = starting a haphazard trade, a trader who transferred SL to BE within an EU trade is just like a trader who's opening a haphazard order in EU trade with SL = -30 pips.

3-When you start two lots and both hit SL, any new trade BOTH 2 lots must hit TP in order to be profitable, moving SL to BE will decrease your winning % drastically.

4- Have you ever noticed someone goes TP to BE when he is -15 pips?? It makes exactly the identical sense, or possibly a better approach!! Since 1 trade can hit BE and another hit on the -30 pips SL and you shed -30 pips instead of -60!! . So moving SL to BE is only a psychological product where you want to feel safe. While the fact puts you.

5-Why would you move SL to BE? Why not 10 pips or 20 or longer? Because you would like to provide the transaction more room, ideal?? Guess what, keeping the older SL provides the trade MORE room and you have more chance hit your TP!!


6-You are moving out, or going to sleep. . .etc, Then instead of transferring SL to BE, close your 30 pips and input another transaction at a retractment or another pair ! The specific same thing.


Conclusion

Moving SL to BE will reduce your winning percent. If you do your homework and studied confident about% of hitting on TP and your system, never go SL to BE.

Originally Posted by ;

Your query is a little fun to me,

may be the significance of electrical wave type vs Foreign Exchange waveform..haha. .


I am an electrical engineer also
if I cite . . .hahaha
I got a sense why u ask this. .

Not certain what you're here also much akukaya I know I think 3 or 4 electrical engineers and many more people in the study of sine waves, ffts, SSA etc ). I see it as a disadvantage for fx more than an advantage!

Originally Posted by ;

It doesn't have anything to do with amount of capital, they're simply trading a longer timeframe than you. They also may choose a bigger equal stop (i.e. two individuals trading the exact same timeframe will differ of size of stop).

I understand how distinct timerames have various goals, but 100 pips profit is 100 pips profit no mater what chart you used to opt to enter the trade. My mindset is that you will not go broke taking a profit.

But even though I'd personally shut out a transaction for this profit rather than just shing my SL up, my point was that I do believe it it better for someone to escape at BE rather than in a reduction.

BTW: Rob Mondave, I wasn't directing this at you but in a post in an old thread which had the individual up over 100 pips, but he desired a even 150 pips and wound up carrying it until he was stopped out for a 100 pip loss. That's actually over a 200 pip fall in equity that he just watched without any action....that is what I can not imagine doing. Everything you do (moving SL to BE) whenever you're in profit on a more trade I'd consider normal (though I'd shut it out to lock in profit and get back into the trade at the next retracement if conditions were great....but that is just based on my short-term mindset, I suppose). I meant no disrespect to anyone.

Trading is a business of which success depends upon managing and minimizing risk. It's not at all dependent upon ones amount of winning trades. Winning is always referred back to by the argument put forward in this thread. Nothing could be shortsighted in trading compared to creating winning ones dream. The hardest way would be to decide upon investing in a system/methodology that wins a proportion of transactions, but risks more on average than that which is won. I have been fortunate to meet and have as mentors a few powerful traders and all of them have stipulations of where and when to move stops to breakeven in an unfolding trade chain within their methods. These stipulations were usually came at testing proved that it was much more profitable to move a stop to breakeven at some point in a transaction, than to permit the transaction a. Trying telling pros such as John Carter and Robert Miner who BE stops are noobish and they'll only laugh at you.

Originally Posted by ;

I understand how distinct timerames have various objectives, but 100 pips profit is 100 pips profit no mater what chart you used to decide to enter the trade.

The significance of 100 pips will vary from trader to trader. 100 pips for me may be more like 20 for you - an amount to risk to see additional gains.

Originally Posted by ;

My mindset is just that you won't go broke taking a profit.

I think that mindset is damaging for many traders. It can be useful for people looking for little, quick profit here and there, but many of us are looking to maintain our trades for days, weeks or months. I'm a position trader, so my emphasis is rather than rapidly shing to BE or to lock in a profit. Closing them because they have made some cash is cutting myself short if I'm looking to hold the entrances, and wasting the opportunities. If I begin strangling my trades in a fashion, I really could go broke by taking a profit, as I mightn't win enough to conquer my losses.

Originally Posted by ;

It's is not at all dependent upon ones number of winning trades.

Yes it is. Winrate is half the equation necessary for profitable trading. It's also dependent on risk. However, managing risk doesn't necessarily imply nearing the loss on a trade, although it's possible to minimise risk on a trade, but damage expectation that entire risk increases.

Originally Posted by ;

it was much more profitable to move a stop to breakeven at a point in a trade, than to enable the trade a full stop-out.

The issue for me isn't moving a stop up as a commerce works well, but about the strategy of moving a stop up to BE very fast, which may smother a trade.

Originally Posted by ;

LOL, actually read this on a bar room wall (School days),
To do Would Be to BE, Plato
To Be Would Be to do, Socrates
Do be do so, Sinatra

This guy is not engineer. He has to be a poor one If he's.

Moving to BE at crucial points can be very helpful.

Well, I'm ain't concerned to be wrong or noobish.

I'm more worried about doing what I can to protect against losing my money. U??

Originally Posted by ;

Well, I am ain't worried to be wrong or noobish.

I am more concerned with doing what I can to prevent losing my money. U??

Which Is N'T Erroneous!

Originally Posted by ;

I'm by no mean a pro trader or something. But I'm quite good in statistics and mathematics because of my electrical engineering career.

Anyhow I will describe to you moving SL to BE is quite bad and noobish in several simple words w/o using complex math.

1-You open two lots , with both TP 30 pips. One hit TP, another you go SL to BE. The 2nd lot hit BE, no problem, you got your 30 pips, right? WRONG!

Surely Sir, if you have TWO transactions BOTH at 30pip TP and ONE of these gets hit, doesn't another get hit too?

I see a fundamental flaw in your excuse.

ps. Others might have pointed out this, but I didn't read the thread.