commisso, it's ok to be harsh. i don't mind anyone giving it to me straight. my point of this thread is something that is hard for me to put into words. for example, this post: i really do understand the above concept 100%. my reason for starting this thread is that i have never found anything in the real markets that got me past break even. for example, if i tried to go after m_c_a98's first example, my losers would just end up happening 2x as often as my winners. if i went after something like m_c_a98's second example, my win rate would be pitiful and it would probably be way less than 40% right. this is what i'm getting at. although i know there are more ways to skin the cat, whenever i try different ways, i always end up 1:1. the last system i tried had a positive expectancy of only +.11% per trade after a month of trading. if i traded it a little longer, it probably would have gone back down to 0. just to make myself clear, if i tried to do m_c_a98's second example. say i went for winners 5x my losses. i KNOW my win rate would not be 40%! it seems everything i do wants to come back to break even. with all this being said, someone be honest here. I HAVE NEVER ADDED TO A WINNER ON ONE TRADE EVER. if THIS is how you get past break even.....then this is a whole new issue. LET ME REPHRASE THE QUESTION....... is it possible to get the results of m_c_a98's 2nd example entering and exiting with the exact same # of shares? or better yet, for example, TRADING ONLY 1 EMINI CONTRACT AT A TIME?
this may be letting the cat out of the bag, but i don't care anymore. i need to make money at this at some point. hehe "You are going to have to press your winners if you really expect to consider yourself with the ability to make a living or extra income. Otherwise, face the truth that you are only playing to break even. Who wants to play for a tie? I sure don't! I remember a trader asking me how I felt about making money in my early days. She wanted to know how much I made. I indicated to her that if I did not make at least a thousand dollars a day, it wasn't even worth trading to me. She said that she would be happy with a hundred a day. I asked her if she added to winners. She said that there was no reason to add to winners." IS THE ABOVE STATEMENT TRUE OR FALSE AND IS IT ALSO MY PROBLEM??? it's funny that i find myself not able to break even and i don't add to winners......and the guy in the above quote says if you want to get past break even you need to add to winners! i have more beans to spill if i have to.
The method I am employing right now does require me to add to winners, but it is not always necessary in order to produce a positive expectancy... I make money 3-4 days out of every 10 (if I am lucky), but have a nice expectancy on the macro tf...
ok, i won't say it's impossible, but admit it's flat out FUCK!NG HARD! this is why everyone's losing their money in the stock market. instead of adding to winners, people are overheating their tradestations looking for the best entry setup. i will say though, if you've found a way to produce a positive expectancy in the real markets, not on some excel spreadsheet, without adding to winners -- MY HAT IS OFF TO YOU. while we're at it, can we all admit that the concept of adding to winners is one of the most important, yet most avoided subjects discussed on this web site? there are a few others too..
gordon, My final conclusion on that thread was that the market pays the correct odds minus the vig. So yes, you have to beat the market some way. Either with a hit rate in excess of 50% or a risk to reward ratio which is greater than the correct odds. It's not much different than roulette, you have to figure out some way to beat the table. You can try to tilt probablilities in your favor by assuming things about the unknown. The simplest and most common assumption is markets will trend. If you have ever based a trading decision on previous price movement, it's not that great a leap to assume others are also basing decisions on price movement. If you assume that a series of upticks, even though they may just be a totally random occurance, will inspire others to buy, you may be able to get in, and if others see that after you get in, prices continue to rise, and they get in, and then you get out before everybody else does, that you might do better than breakeven for crying out loud!
Gekko I just told you that I DO add to winners... It really all depends on your personality and your goals...
lol i know i know! that was meant towards anyone else who reads what i wrote. (that wasn't directed at you)
my question to you is: have you come to this conclusion WITH or WITHOUT adding to winners in your trading?