Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Anatomy of a Bad Trade

Recommended Posts

retitle anatomy of impatient trader:smileytongue:

 

no support and resistance on charts , sold above support  4  s/r touches  incl  res = supp

 

ranging market 

 

no clear test of support , first breakout is usually testing support , sold on untested support

 

up trend line broken , but down trend  not formed  , two sets of peaks troughsrequired

 

bottom of channel not broken

 

see 30 min , 1 hour and 4 hour charts

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHXIE5rGvek

 

daxs.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,  I'm afraid you are missing the obvious and creating complexity where none exists.

 

The unmissable bolting red line across the chart at 11350 IS the support turned resistance line. Entry was on a valid re-test and rejection of that line.

 

The failure was either a) not taking profit at the next support level for a scalp trade, or b) adjusting stop to break even and not allowing the trade 'room to breath'.

 

Scalp or swing? don't try to do both at once.

Share this post


Link to post

If you are scalping ,then you need to exit once a bottomdiagnol trend line formed  and two or 3 bars  above support.

This   should be in the scalping rule

 

the stop sholud be 10 pips above previous  support for swing

 

 

channels as per example are also useful  , it failed to make a  third  touch  on channel  top

 

 

There was no channel , and it was  really in chop zone, a channel would have given a double top , failure of third touch  was good price action to go short.Thiswould be my text book entry, after break of two supports , here  there are many easy scalps below 113

 

 

 

channels  as per example  

 

Share this post


Link to post

The wonderful thing about trend and counter trend lines is that you get to re-draw them over and over again. :smileyhappy:

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Topics
      12,429
    • Total Posts
      63,174
    • Total Members
      83,860
    Newest Member
    ichukx
    Joined 20/09/20 00:27
  • Posts

    • "Nobel Prize for Science winner Professor Levitt of Stanford - one of the few who called this thing correctly back in February - with a population fatality rate of 0.04 to 0.05%, largely regardless of lockdown Now calls it again - on how science has let us all down dreadfully:"   https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1277543603762585600/pu/vid/1280x720/iFYywrcFxG1CLAkO.mp4?tag=10
    • The reality, testing now up to 90,000 a day (many times greater than in March) = 'new' cases also up. If you came into contact with a cold or flu virus even months ago (and probably were asymptomatic) you would be a confirmed 'new' case. But new hospital admissions and new deaths are still negligible. Compare March with now on the chart. Second lockdown starting soon. you are being played
    • interesting that Schlossberg points to discipline and flexibility - which at first "sight" sounds like a trade-off
×
×