Yes. His only purpose is on ET is to post what an ass he is. But once in a while his bullshit needs to be called out. He has proven time and time again he has no idea what he is talking about.
FYI: bets in this thread are off-topic. Just start your own thread for making your idiotic bets. Man, this is not a gamblers and addicts site, this is a traders site. And: I doubt anybody takes you serious anymore for any bet with you since you are a cheater as you refuse to pay what you owe surf you lost in your last bet. You should first fix this damage to regain some reputation...
If you are positioned sized properly, it makes sense not to use stops. Wow Surf, this is a beaut. Again, you are a failed trader so I expect nothing less from you then the above. Keep up the good work. Account size has NOTHING to do with it. Trading is all a numbers game. It's win % and more importantly, average winner vs average loser. In your case or the way you talk about trading one would need an average winner about 20 times the size of your average loser. The problem is you have so few winning trades these big losses would wipe out your account pretty quick. Sure if you trade 1 lots in a big account and never take losses you might not blow out. But you will just continuously lose money. Most people are in trading to make money Surf. i know that might come as a shock to someone as clueless as yourself.
http://tradingmarkets.com/recent/do_stops_hurt_your_trading_performance-677693.html Here's a review on a test of 1.5 million actual trades that reached the same conclusion. And some of you will take anonymous internet posters word over quantatative studies?
Instead of attacking me, man. Why not wonder why test after test indicate stops degrade system performance? Why is this??
Surf, still no mention of the max drawdown of each system. Just because outright performance is better doesn't necessarily translate into a more palatable equity curve for investors.