How so? $15K, 20 Lots: Loser 1: $100X20=$2000, now trade 17 Loser 2: $100X17=$1700, now trade 15 Loser 3: $100X15=$1500, now trade 13 Loser 4: $100X13=$1300, now trade 11 Loser 5: $100X11=$1100, now trade 10 Loser 6: $100X10=$1000, now trade 8 So your losers total $8,600, which brings your account to $6,400. Or do you use a method of scaling down faster?
No problem. You've had a day of results now its time to document them. Its very easy to do so as nearly all clearing firms send out a daily P/L report. In order to remain interested, I do need to see some sort of commitment towards proper documentation. After getting through the pages of crap/spew in your journal, its going to be tough to follow you for much longer without some sort of transparency. Mike
Seems to be a common thought. I joined twitter today where I will also post my trades, and nothing else. http://twitter.com/sicktraderII
Depends on how you define "edge" HOWEVER unless a system has a positive expectancy to begin with, there is no MM that can make it profitable over the long run.
Only in the minds of hopefuls & paper traders. Money management is not an edge, it is a basic requirement for a profitable strategy.
LOL. This thread makes way more sense without sick's nonsensical logic about money management being the only strategy. Most of the pages are two posts without posting a highly overleveraged trade. Don't worry, sick. I won't ever hear from you.
dude better find the edge elsewhere, there is no money management rule that can revert negative expectancy per se. the only thing that MM provides is the ability of not blowing up when you have a real edge, which happens quite few times.
As always. I would take the trades the way he's doing it if I also saw orders with the stop limits placed at the time of entry. If that's the whole system, and really does sound like it is, then it will be a few more trades till total blowout.