[QUOTE=“rindoan;677793”] When you set a stop loss order you either set a stop buy or sell order that is transferred into a market order once that level is hit or you set a stop limit buy or sell order that is transferred into a limit order once the target is hit. You attempt to belittle people by random statements about Wikipedia etc however you are in fact just embarrassing yourself and your lack of understanding.[/QUOTE] A pending sell stop order to close a long position isn’t a pending order dontcha know 
Ahh yeah you are right, when we are talking forex the word ‘pending’ all of a sudden changes its meaning in the English language
btw this thread is thread is completely off track by now…
I am telling you what is universally accepted buddy. Buddy, I understand how Stop losses and Take profits work but it has been universally accepted that they are called normal orders, not pending orders. Just accept you are wrong and that you have learned something new and move on with your life.
Do provide some evidence on how a stop loss order is considered a market order when it is placed.
I imagine a butterfly is a fly that has butter on it or does the word suddenly change its meaning in the English language lol
You don’t make sense. Evidence was provided ever since in the link i and the other dude posted.
If you are referring to your link to metatrader 5 on terminology you are even more clueless than I thought.
Let me try to break it down for you so you understand.
Let us say you enter a long trade on a market order and you immediately set a stop loss order 30 pips below where you got entered into the trade.
That fact you seem not able to grasp is that a stop loss order is a [B]pending[/B] sell order (in this example) up until the time when the price hits your predefined level at which point in time the [B]pending [/B]sell order you have set becomes converted into a [B]market [/B]sell order awaiting best execution.
In order for you to understand this even better I have here quoted the definition of a market order for you from investopeia:
Market Order Definition | Investopedia
An order that an investor makes through a broker or brokerage service to buy or sell an investment [B]immediately [/B]at the best available current price. A market order is the default option and is likely to be executed because it does not contain restrictions on the buy/sell price or the timeframe in which the order can be executed.
From the link we provided earlier Types of Orders - MetaTrader 5 Help
[B]Take Profit[/B]
Take Profit order is intended for gaining the profit when the security price has reached a certain level. Execution of this order results in complete closing of the whole position.[I][B] It is always connected to an open position or a pending order[/B][/I]. [B][I]The order can be requested only together with a market or a pending order.[/I][/B] Terminal checks long positions with Bid price for meeting of this order provisions (the order is always set above the current Bid price), and it does with Ask price for short positions (the order is always set below the current Ask price).
[QUOTE=“aceofpips;677821”]From the link we provided earlier Types of Orders - MetaTrader 5 Help Take Profit Take Profit order is intended for gaining the profit when the security price has reached a certain level. Execution of this order results in complete closing of the whole position. It is always connected to an open position or a pending order. The order can be requested only together with a market or a pending order. Terminal checks long positions with Bid price for meeting of this order provisions (the order is always set above the current Bid price), and it does with Ask price for short positions (the order is always set below the current Ask price).[/QUOTE]
It’s still a pending order.
In the case of an open long position, a take profit order is a pending sell limit order and the stop loss is a pending sell stop order… Both are pending orders. I’m scratching my head as to why you don’t think they are. Lol whatever man.
Get a room you three. lol.
Thanks for the thread. Very interesting. Question: Would a guaranteed stop loss have saved a trader in this scenario?
Thanks, G.
From Clint’s thread.
The CHF Debacle, Why it Happened and Where do We Go From Here | Meet the Experts
Not necessarily. slippage was always a risk in that trade as the SNB could have either moved the floor up to 1.30 or removed it, both of which would have caused no liquidity and a multi-hundred pip rallies in 2 minutes.
Some brokers honoured SLs, most didn’t/couldn’t.
If you show me a broker that guarantees a stop loss I will show you a broker that is a market maker.
You might think trading with a market maker broker is a good thing however I would prefer not to trade with a broker that makes money when I lose given the obvious conflict of interest.
PS: Yes we kinda did derail the thread for the last few pages discussing semantics 
Yeah it is contradictory. I’m trying to list [I]ways[/I] of minimising or avoiding risk. Some of them may not work together.
A 500 pip stop loss isn’t silly if it’s appropriate for your trade. I actually had a live CHF position on “Black Thursday”. Price gapped about 350 pips against me. But my original stop loss was 300 pips (it was a swing trade), and my initial risk was 1%. In the end, all I lost was 2% of my equity. No big deal. But there are some who lost hundreds of thousands. How did I survive when many blew up? I just listed a few of my answers.
Watch this 4min video interview with Thomas Peterffy the CEO and founder of Interactive Brokers.
Swiss aftershock
They were out earlier saying they lost abt 120m in unsecure client losses and he now said over 100m of those were from just 5 accounts…damn.
A trader focused on a single pair runs a 50/50 chance of a major loss from an illiquid crisis move in one of the two currencies in that pair. A day trader in a swissie pair using 10:1 leverage would have been completely wiped out last week.
As a trader branches into more pairs this risk declines, but it does so in a lopsided way that would naturally be biased toward the majors (as most pairs involve them).
The more exotic the pairs get, the more problematic in terms of spread costs and liquidity they become. Suppose then that you stick to the following currencies:
AUD
CAD
CHF
EUR
GBP
JPY
NZD
USD
Suppose that you want to put on 10% maximum risk at any given time (a round number).
Risking the listed percentage of your account value in the following 19 pairs:
AUD/JPY 0.21%
AUD/NZD 1.28%
AUD/USD 0.21%
CHF/JPY 0.64%
EUR/AUD 0.43%
EUR/CAD 1.28%
EUR/GBP 0.21%
EUR/JPY 0.43%
EUR/USD 0.21%
GBP/AUD 0.43%
GBP/CAD 1.06%
GBP/CHF 0.43%
GBP/JPY 0.21%
GBP/USD 0.21%
NZD/JPY 0.85%
NZD/USD 0.21%
USD/CAD 0.21%
USD/CHF 1.28%
USD/JPY 0.21%
(Total 10%)
would surprisingly yield a pretty evenly distributed currency risk structure as follows:
AUD 1.28%
CAD 1.28%
CHF 1.17%
EUR 1.28%
GBP 1.28%
JPY 1.28%
NZD 1.17%
USD 1.28%
(Total 10%)
You cannot simply trade the same position size in each pair without putting more risk on in a given currency than in others. Doing so would yield the following currency risk structure:
AUD 1.32%
CAD 0.79%
CHF 0.79%
EUR 1.32%
GBP 1.58%
JPY 1.58%
NZD 0.79%
USD 1.84%
(Total 10%)
Notably, evening out the risk with position sizing would have actually put many traders in to BIGGER positions in the Swissie because most of them are probably heavy in the euro, pound, yen and the dollar.
What is there to learn?
Never believe a central banker.
^Good point.
I remember looking at OANDA’s open orders chart, and 90% of retail traders were long EURCHF.
In general, avoid betting with the dumb money.
So do we fight the FED?
I think just ignoring them will suffice. Not to mention enhance overall longevity.