Just the opposite. Every serious TA trader runs extremely thorough stats on every nuance of the approach and general price action.
Many successful TA traders use extremely simple trade management. Sometimes as simple as 1:1 R:R, win or loss. If it wasn't entry, how could those approaches with 1:1 R:R work and more so, overcome commissions and slippage?
Up 160bp marked (152 on futures switch). My best trade since the Bernanke short. 31.52 to 28.10 cash. Nish!
================= Mr Cornix; TA is the study of price + volume; so everyone uses it-unless someone uses market orders + never studies the price he gets filled at or exits .LOL Wisdom is profitable to direct
No, this is not correct. Exiting is after a profit or loss -- so the outcome is known. The outcome is unknown on the entry. Where do you get these ideas? They are highly unusual.
Its known at what point you bailed, its not known if the market will continue in your direction, you could bail after just a fraction of the move and that wont cover all those random payments to others will it mr surf.
Surf, Here's a small test: you are welcome to take my published entries and apply the following simple rules to them: 10 tick stop-loss, 12 tick profit target. Nothing else. You will be surprised that this 1:1 risk reward (1:1 due to commissions) would still produce profit and win rate would swing toward above 50%. Obviously with random entries with 1:1 risk reward would be impossible to achieve even gross profit, let alone overcome the costs of trading, right? I use different money management not because it's the only way to profit, but cause it produces fatter bottom line despite lower win rate in the long-term.