This is why I havent jumped into the mechanical boat...cant put entry/exit signals in a way that it is simple....
Mechanical doesn't necessarily mean rigid, and "simple" doesn't necessarily require a mechanical approach. Simple can mean isolating those factors which, for example, regularly signal the end of a trend and then focusing on those factors mechanically rather than waffle around in a should-I-shouldn't-I state. Knowing that each of these factors might have a slightly different weight in each instance helps one to maintain focus and avoid re-inventing the exit strategy with every trade.
ah! of course, so basically learning to live with uncertainty of those x instances and not be as anal...hmm! Hadn't seen it that way, thanks!!
Uncertainty, however, needn't mean cluelessness. If, for example, one has noticed that the uptrend is usually in trouble if price drops below the last swing low, even if it recovers, he can at least begin eyeing the exits while he looks for other signs of trouble. The trader may not have any control over what the market does, but he is in complete control over how he engages it.
Understood, also refreshing reminder that cluelessness is not far away...the situation you mention when a pb goes vs your position...its always an interesting event, nailbitting as it is, but agree, its also those "other" signs that help make a call.
And even if one misinterprets everything, there's always the option to re-enter. And it reduces the nail-biting.
Systematic trading transforms a craft into a (pseudo)-science, so one can apply all kinds of scientific methods. Discretionary trading also allows people to experiment a strategy in live market condition, but it is slower, more costly and less comprehensive. The execution side of systematic trading is even more important to me, as it allows one to just watch a computer to trade and enjoy a more normal life.