This is the ultimate riddle: in order to get rich without insider information, you have to have nearly unshakable faith in your investments so you can keep them when they flop around. Risk management just cuts the long term winners, if it's too aggressive. This is partly why I like Livermore's book, since it covers how to add size as the stock goes up, and how it should look during normal reactions as the trend progresses. I think the only thing that killed J.L. in the end was his habit of plunging. Scaling in and setting your initial risk (not running retracements) as the datum was how he could handle it, psychologically. Of course, it would be much better to be an option maestro and just win every day. That would be so boring, you might just bully the muppets on a forum to pass the time!
Is that the best use of your capital, tie it up for decades? I suppose that if your objective is to be right instead of earning a decent return, not taking losses is a good strategy.
The devil is in the details. I keep hearing about cutting long term winners. As far as I know there is no law that prevents one from re-entering a trade after they have sold a position.
In most careers you can't screw up, or at least not let anyone find out about it. Trading and business are way different because as long as you cut losses (or settle somehow) you can always bounce back. One good purchase can make up for many many fire sales! Same with contracts / programs and real estate flips. Speaking of, you bascially can't lose in California! Aside from the impossibility of insurance, going forward.