Dave from Sydney's Journal [Awarded Title: the Box-Trader]

[Dave]

DAX really pissed me off, 5 pips slippage on a 5.5 pip seed. A great spot to enter with the seed at the all time high, and obviously someone else thought so too and the level jumped and then retraced hard. Happy with the GU and EJ trades though. Cya

Screen Shot 2014-05-27 at 5.26.36 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-05-27 at 5.25.26 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-05-27 at 6.19.18 PM.png

[Dave]

Not my night, but the setups were valid and the losses small. So a successful night of trading, even if not profitable.

Screen Shot 2014-05-28 at 6.51.07 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-05-28 at 6.49.32 PM.png

Screen Shot 2014-05-28 at 6.48.51 PM.png

[immy]

I'd say you pushed it a bit there on the GU but Dax and Ej were ok. all in all, good trading mate... as always

[Dave]

You're right. GU had bolted and I should have left well enough alone.

[bambino45]

Rule no. 1 in trading: Never let a winner become a loser! BE trades will never ruin your account!

This is an interesting quote and I'd be very interested to hear the thoughts of others on this subject.

I have come across quite a few people in my time that challenge this oft quoted mantra so would welcome thoughts and insight from those active on here.


Cheers

[immy]

Rule no. 1 in trading: Never let a winner become a loser! BE trades will never ruin your account!

This is an interesting quote and I'd be very interested to hear the thoughts of others on this subject.

I have come across quite a few people in my time that challenge this oft quoted mantra so would welcome thoughts and insight from those active on here.


Cheers

I can't think of anything that can be said against this FACT! IMHO

[bambino45]

Those that I have heard challenging it are the ones that do not manage trades. They put their stops and targets in all pre-defined and leave the trade to hit target or hit stop.

The argument is that once trade management begins then the pre-defined R:R on which the success is based is altered.

Very different context to AIMS trading. If you consider a pre-defined 1:3 risk reward and chopping winners off at BE (which hit that new SL but then have hit target) but not doing likewise on trades going against you then you can get in the hole. Technically you can go under not letting winners turn losers but if you don't let losers turn winners then you may as well not start in the first place. BE trades certainly won't ruin your account, that is fact but shortening winners can hurt your account.

It's two slightly different things, Never letting a winner turn into a loser and the fact that BE trades are free of risk. These things keep my grey matter ticking along.

It's all about consistency.

Cheers

[Dave]

Spot on, Richard. It's all about consistency. And if through consistent application of a trade management system you can produce profits in the long term, then whatever it is you choose to do must be working.

I struggled with my trade management big time when I first came to AIMS (you'll see this from some of the trades I posted in the early days, chopping off winners as soon as they paused or even came back half a pip), and it's still something I know I can improve on everyday. I think this was mainly due to what I was doing when I very first started to learn to trade. It was all about hitting a 5 or 10 pip daily target and grabbing it and being done, and I watched plenty of times those 10 pip winners become 50 pip W3s, but did it from the sidelines. And in the end I chose that that way of trading wasn't for me. So I'm still trying to beat that out of myself every trade, resisting the urge to just grab the profit when it's there.

As for the shift to BE.... my opinion is that so long as the reason you shift to BE is valid and consistently applied, then without doubt those BE trades can never ruin your account. In my previous post I've said that I will move to BE at +10 (assuming that I don't have an AIMS level to trail that can place my stop loss at better than BE), or that I will move to BE when the price action tells me to. And this price action includes meeting a level of support/resistance in the form of a higher timeframe AIMS level (there's a GU trade above showing this), or a fruit candle in a fib target zone showing completed W5 and a likely reversal (there's an EJ trade above showing this).
So I guess my point is that just closing a position because it's now at BE and you're happy to get out without damaging your account is definitely not the way to go. Rather, being open to what the market is telling you and protecting your capital when it is appropriate to do so is my preferred method.

Imagine if you took the GU Famous Pattern yesterday (29 May) from M15, with a trailing stop loss behind the M15 AIMS level. That would have been a loser despite the big FO/LO break showing +30 pips, the new M15 AIMS level just never came. Imagine if you let that trade come back to give a loss after showing potential 3:1! No thanks.

You're an experienced trader and I know you know all this. But I do enjoy the discussion!
Cheers, Dave

[bambino45]

Thanks Dave, very insightful and it's the application of this knowledge in the context that is applicable to you that is important. It is interesting to hear about pre-AIMS baggage people may have. Different styles have etched a certain way of doing things into your psyche.

I think the Mark Douglas book in many ways helps you erase any of that. Immy is a staunch advocate and I've seen him post countless times the mantra of being in the now. The trade you have open demands your 100% focus. Trading what you see and what you see only.

I think we often feel we need to be doing something when a trade is open. Messing with a SL or moving a target. It makes us FEEL like we are managing something. If you consider how much real action we take during a trade it's a tiny percentage as a ratio of the amount of time that trade is open. Even on a long move you may only move the SL two or three times with possibly a manual exit. With one click movements these days it's literally 5-10 seconds over what could be a 30 minute move (or longer).

Like you, I enjoy these discussions.

Cheers

[Kyle]

I am one that has come with an amount of pre-AIMS baggage, but am happy to embrace AIMS and try to let go of all that extra "stuff" I have inherited along the way.
The explanation given to me for a prior methodology was that moving SL to BE prevents the trade from being able to "breathe", however, one must take that in the context of the methodology. AIMS methodology is different to many other methods (as they are also with each other).
If you drill down into what AIMS is, it is a breakout type strategy with some kick ass rules that make it truly simple for those who spend the time to live and breathe it properly (I am getting there I hope).
Now, as a breakout trade, especially on the one minute, the trade succeeds and fails quickly, and if it does happen to fail, I would much prefer to get out at BE instead of my emergency SL level. The moving of the S/L is management of the trade and protection of profits. That is also why we cut the trade out at the sell dot (on a long) or buy dot (on a short).