Oh, come on... If you're selling in 30 seconds [after "x"], you're already using a stop... a TIME stop.
hahaha your high agin dude.. put pipe down for a minute.. come down off that cloud ps hows that fatty atkins diet treatin you bro me? i got B/P of a newborn child.
I think we both know that a time stop is not what people have been referring to on this thread as a stop. peace axeman
Let's talk about Toby Crabel: Buy at the open and sell at the close (winner or looser). Is that regarded as working with stops? Thanks.
To be fair, I don't think your method falls under what most people think of when it comes to "trading without stops" either
imo, I would think stops, as long as they serve our expected purposes, could be based on whether time, volume, number of bars, indicator value, etc., besides price.
On one hand, of course it is. It's how you limit the amount of damage you'll take on this trade. On the other hand, consideration of any type of time stop is out of the realm of "letting losses run against you for the wrong reasons".... which stops of some sort necessarily prevent. I submit... Defending a strategy of "not using stops because we sell after _X_ period of time", is symantic and inapproprate in a discussion about preserving capital by the use of stops.
Semantics.....yup, thats what this is. Because your basically calling EVERYTHING a stop. If I exit at a set price, its a stop. If I exit after some time, its a stop. If I exit at the close, its a stop. Lemme guess, if I exit when ma's cross, its a "signal stop"? So what isnt a stop? If I buy and hold, and sell at retirement, thats a time stop too. At this point, the phrase "always use stops", becomes completely meaningless. peace axeman
Nope. "Not using a stop" is buying JDSU at $90 and still holding it at $4.... or Lucent at $50, and holding down to $.52 (as my accountant did... it's back to $4.12, last I saw the ticker... big whup). A few to several of these often leads to even bigger errors... like doubling up a couple of times because "it's just GOTTA rally from here". You're obviously a smart guy axe, but your argument here is just plain silly.
Still arguing semantics here. Your simply saying that not using a stop is buying a stock, and having no reason to exit as it goes down. What if the guy said, ok its gone down too far FOR ME, and just exited as some undetermined price. Would you call this an emotional pain stop? There are plenty of ways to exit a stock without using stops. But you define any exit as using some kind of stop. So there is no point in discussing it. I define a stop as a price which forces me tro exit (Assuming I follow my rules). You can use your definition, ill use mine. But I think my definition fits the title of this thread more accurately. TIGHT stops versus LOOSE stops versus no stops. I think its pretty clear we are talking about PRICE stops. peace axeman