There's a direct correlation between your "bad entries" and your stops being hit so often. If they had been "good entries", then your stops would not have been hit nearly as much. So Stops are good for protecting your capital, when you make a wrong or "bad entry". Not everyone is going to nail every entry all of the time, right? *** Electric Savant actually started a thread along these lines where he tried to determine how often he could lose ... something about losing to win
I read somewhere, today, that GS removed GOOG from one of their indices/holdings, because it had gone down enough -- about 14% -- to hit their stop loss! Are GS loosers?
Spoken like a true paper trader. Perhaps you should stick to breaking out news stories and refrain from posting comments that pertain to real trading.
like it said you have to trade the trend.........that market (1994-2003) provided plenty of opportunities to get long on pullbacks on the way up and AFTER the trend changed provided plenty of opportunities to get short on the way down a recent example......just look at how many suckers got liquidated at 1275 on the s&p......had they waited only ten days they could've not only gotten out their longs at 1400 (10% HIGHER) but they could've reversed and gotten short.
My trading improved 1000-fold when I stopped using stops. Now I start very small and if the noise presents greater opportunity I add to it. If the trade isn't going to work it isn't going to work and I self liquidate. Not using stops shouldn't be misinterpreted as not managing risk, however. I manage risk but I take control of it. I don't leave it to the market at some arbitrary number.
So, I assume that if one were to search your prior posts no mention of you using stops would be found. Is that right?