A winner on every trade? Is it possible?

[brandnew2fx]

or realise the loss and put the money to work in more profitable positions, thus creating a greater profit despite taking the loss.

I have always been wondering about this way of thinking and perhaps someone can answer me…what if you put it in a more profitable position but you start losing too in that new “profitable” positions…how can you fortell that it would be profitable anyway

[Master_Tang]

Just to clarify, you’re saying that if the position size is sufficiently small enough to weather any size draw-down then you would sit through any size draw-down?

But I guess the question is whether you should - it’s the age-old investment question of whether to sit-tight through a drawdown or realise the loss and put the money to work in more profitable positions, thus creating a greater profit despite taking the loss.

There’s a difference between idly sitting through a drawdown situation, and being proactive in one;)

[brandnew2fx]

There’s a difference between idly sitting through a drawdown situation, and being proactive in one;)

Wow…great storehouse of knowledge here.

How does one be proactive in a drawdown ??

[Master_Tang]

You’re gonna have to use some gray matter, because I sure as hell ain’t gonna hand it to you on a platter.

If you call yourself a trader, you’ll know how to be proactive.

[brandnew2fx]

???

I am no trader as yet

[brandnew2fx]

Now I am starting to think if there is any substance or wisdom behind what you said.

Come to think of it…how does one become proactive in a drawdown???

The way I see it, you either hold on or get out. There is no third option.

I take back what I said about storehouse of knowledge.

[Master_Tang]

Suit yourself:)

There are more options than you listed.
Think about it.

I gave you plenty of clues earlier.

[brandnew2fx]

Suit yourself:)

There are more options than you listed.
Think about it.

I gave you plenty of clues earlier.

How do you give clues when you yourself are clueless ?

I’ll just end this here and mark you off as someone I would not seek knowledge from.

[DodgeV83]

How do you give clues when you yourself are clueless ?

I’ll just end this here and mark you off as someone I would not seek knowledge from.

On what are you basing your assertion that he is clueless?

Looking at the facts of the thread:

1. You gave $500 to someone largely because they’ve never lost a trade.

2. The account hasn’t been open 2 weeks, too short a time to judge the profitibility of a trader.

3. It is not uncommon for an unprofitable system to go on a 2 week win-streak.

4. He made 181% on the account in this short time, meaning he is trading with high leverage.

5. There are, in fact, more than two options available to you when experiencing large drawdown, but you claim there is not.

I do not believe you are in a position to be calling anyone else “clueless”.

[Master_Tang]

@brandnew2fx

I think if you read everything properly before jumping to conclusions you would find that he does say the system took 32 years to develop.

Here’s a question that YOU should have asked.

Why would someone that has a supposedly successful system need to be pimping crap on Twitter to start an account?

Just sayin’…

P.S. Thanks Dodge! You summed that up nicely!

Cheers!

[brandnew2fx]

I think if you read everything properly before jumping to conclusions you would find that he does say the system took 32 years to develop.

Now the thing would be he could be saying it as it is or he may be lying.

Things become very simple when you boil it down to only 2 options.

When you quote something…quote it in the proper context…otherwise it would show you off as twisting words to fit your argument.

Now the question is…why do you need to quote out of context ??

[Master_Tang]

When you quote something…quote it in the proper context…otherwise it would show you off as twisting words to fit your argument.

Now the question is…why do you need to quote out of context ??

What part of anything I quoted twisted your words to suit my argument?

I just said it should have given you pause to think…

Other than the fact that you deem anything I say invalid, I wasn’t aware of any argument.
I was trying to help you keep some money in your pocket.

If you can’t grasp that, you’ve got some expensive lessons coming your way.

[brandnew2fx]

What part of anything I quoted twisted your words to suit my argument?

I just said it should have given you pause to think…

Other than the fact that you deem anything I say invalid, I wasn’t aware of any argument.
I was trying to help you keep some money in your pocket.

If you can’t grasp that, you’ve got some expensive lessons coming your way.

I don’t think my money is ANY of YOUR business

[brandnew2fx]

Hahaha. I would not term that proactively managing a drawdown. Proactively deluding yourself might be more in order.

It still boils down to either hold on or get out. If you double down on your position, irregardless of it being a good or a bad idea, you would have chosen the option of holding on.

If you do what you call a “hedge”, it is not a hedge at all, just a mechanism to fool yourself into saying you do not have a loss. Your position is zeroed but only now it takes up twice the transactions costs to achieve the same “get out” decision.

[PerchTird]

I’m just throwing it out there –

Just maybe - the large drawdown is part of a monthly strategy, where maybe you use the high of the previous month or previous swing high as a stop- so a planned 450 pip stop loss as per your trade rules.

Is this the type of large drawdown we’re talking about? An acceptable one? what’s the point of arguing that?

But for arguements sake, lets say one has also a scalping strategy, where in that big acceptable drawdown of 450 pips, this person actually already made 250 pips, hmm and on the way back to BE for the big drawdown, he scalps another 250 pips? A profitable drawdown in fact. - and now the long term position is making its move and a month later it goes to 900 pips.

Sounds reasonable to me?

[Master_Tang]

MasterTang - do you actually trade in this manner - that is, actively managing drawdowns - or was it merely a suggestion for improving the fictitious system we were discussing?

Yes I do, but there is a lot more to it than just averaging in a position and hoping for the best.
My accounts are US based, so I can’t hedge, nor do I.

[Master_Tang]

I’m just throwing it out there –

Just maybe - the large drawdown is part of a monthly strategy, where maybe you use the high of the previous month or previous swing high as a stop- so a planned 450 pip stop loss as per your trade rules.

Is this the type of large drawdown we’re talking about? An acceptable one? what’s the point of arguing that?

But for arguements sake, lets say one has also a scalping strategy, where in that big acceptable drawdown of 450 pips, this person actually already made 250 pips, hmm and on the way back to BE for the big drawdown, he scalps another 250 pips? A profitable drawdown in fact. - and now the long term position is making its move and a month later it goes to 900 pips.

Sounds reasonable to me?

AVOIDING the large drawdown is the objective.
But your theory here is very close to actuality;)

[Master_Tang]

We come back, then, to the definition of a trade.

For me, a trade is a unique position. So if one is taking a long term position with a large drawdown whilst scalping short-term positions for profit - that to me would be 2 (or more) different trades.

Absolutely.

But I think once you take a position in the market, it should not be the end of your trading day.

The only position that is finite to me, is flat.

[brandnew2fx]

We come back, then, to the definition of a trade.

For me, a trade is a unique position. So if one is taking a long term position with a large drawdown whilst scalping short-term positions for profit - that to me would be 2 (or more) different trades.

Ah…we have a fundamental difference in perception here. You see a trade as a single action ie, if you think the EURUSD was on the way down and you shorted to find it actually going up, that is one trade and if you subsequently added another short, that would be two trades for you then.

I however see that as one trade no matter the number of positions you added to it or not. As long as you continue to take action based on the same read of the market, that is one trade. So you could have 6 positions say in just one trade and when all has been liquidated, that trade is over.

[brandnew2fx]

Not necessarily no. For me it comes down to the aims and objectives of the entries. If you enter a drawdown short and re-short it as an averaging up exercise then that would be the same trade - you’re still looking to short the pair based on the same analysis.

However if you take a long term position but then scalp the swings within it then that’s two separate objectives based off two separate chart patterns / signals /etc. So although the positions are parallel, to me they would be different trades as the objectives are different.

Ok. I see the point.

Just a matter of different trading timeframes…sort of like trading within a trade.