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

[Dave]

Hi again everyone, an interesting night here. Was in a bit of an aggressive mood and it paid dividends on an AUDUSD sell. I was waiting for M5 to generate the exit signal which kept me in when M1 turned against, but after it went on a bit I felt it was time to trail and lock in some profit.....

Screen Shot 2014-01-15 at 7.54.03 PM.png

Similar aggressiveness resulted in a bit of rent on EJ, but a good night overall. Cya tomorrow

Screen Shot 2014-01-15 at 7.19.42 PM.png

[Nikita]

AU looked overhelmed with your orders! Nice trading!

[Dave]

There was plenty of movement during today's Asian session. I hesitated and missed the initial break but after some patience EURJPY gave a lovely setup and sell opportunity. This is picture perfect, I love this pattern! I was super dooper close to closing the add-on right at the peak of W5, finger hovering, but with such a confirmed trend I wanted to give it a real chance to run. Alas it came back and trailing got me out.

Screen Shot 2014-01-20 at 1.26.57 PM.png

[Dave]

I've been struggling lately to define the timeframe that best suits my trading needs and style. It has seemed that every trade I take results in a battle to convert my entry to a higher timeframe, but as a result I completely lose awareness of the reason I entered the market in the first place. As a result I've allowed some winning positions to retrace significantly and result in losers (an obsession that the higher timeframe MUST be right and price MUST continue - forgetting to remain in THE NOW), where if the numerous exit signals that were provided by the timeframe of the entry were followed, then some tidy profits could have been had. I know there are advantages to converting lower timeframe entries to a higher timeframe, but I now recognise that this needs to be done incrementally, slowly moving up timeframes as the market moves in your favour, and not just as a mental decision from the moment the trade is entered. Some positions will automatically present the opportunity to be managed on M15/H1 etc, but those that don't should be managed as such and closed as the lower timeframes signal. Anyway, I did a quick exercise where I wrote down what sort of trader I am, and the first thing I wrote was "I am a forex trader and I take my entry signals from the M1/M5 charts", and I stopped writing after that. In a short sentence I had defined my timeframe and in doing so provided a clear indication as to how I need to manage my positions. In short, while I like the idea of letting positions taken with 5 pip stop losses turn into 1000 pip home runs, the truth is that this hasn't worked for me, and I will concentrate on managing those entries taken from M1/M5 on M1/M5. This doesn't stop me converting entries, but it does stop me becoming blinded by a hope that a higher timeframe trend will result in an entry taken from a lower timeframe running forever. Enough rambling for now, but a valuable experience!

Europe's entry, was stopped out trailing price that showed angulation, M5 showing an extended period of correction so I wasn't interested in converting to M5 :-bd

Screen Shot 2014-01-20 at 6.28.31 PM.png

[immy]

I've been struggling lately to define the timeframe that best suits my trading needs and style. It has seemed that every trade I take results in a battle to convert my entry to a higher timeframe, but as a result I completely lose awareness of the reason I entered the market in the first place. As a result I've allowed some winning positions to retrace significantly and result in losers (an obsession that the higher timeframe MUST be right and price MUST continue - forgetting to remain in THE NOW), where if the numerous exit signals that were provided by the timeframe of the entry were followed, then some tidy profits could have been had. I know there are advantages to converting lower timeframe entries to a higher timeframe, but I now recognise that this needs to be done incrementally, slowly moving up timeframes as the market moves in your favour, and not just as a mental decision from the moment the trade is entered. Some positions will automatically present the opportunity to be managed on M15/H1 etc, but those that don't should be managed as such and closed as the lower timeframes signal. Anyway, I did a quick exercise where I wrote down what sort of trader I am, and the first thing I wrote was "I am a forex trader and I take my entry signals from the M1/M5 charts", and I stopped writing after that. In a short sentence I had defined my timeframe and in doing so provided a clear indication as to how I need to manage my positions. In short, while I like the idea of letting positions taken with 5 pip stop losses turn into 1000 pip home runs, the truth is that this hasn't worked for me, and I will concentrate on managing those entries taken from M1/M5 on M1/M5. This doesn't stop me converting entries, but it does stop me becoming blinded by a hope that a higher timeframe trend will result in an entry taken from a lower timeframe running forever. Enough rambling for now, but a valuable experience!

Europe's entry, was stopped out trailing price that showed angulation, M5 showing an extended period of correction so I wasn't interested in converting to M5 :-bd

Screen Shot 2014-01-20 at 6.28.31 PM.png

Dave,

I enjoyed reading your post. I also discovered this long time ago and have been ever since telling others about the "perils" of this technique of taking entry on lower time frame and converting it into longer time frames. ITs specially harder to do on the faster time frames. You can easily do this on H1,H4 and D1 because you'll have time to analyse the markets. For this reason I support Grant's approach of managing his trades on m1, using his pip wise trade management. Good decision mate. and thanks for sharing.

all the best

[KrisL]

I also tried converting every trade to a higher time frame there for a while, and I learned that you really have to pick and choose when you do it, because there are times when it is more likely to work than others. My take on it:

*First of all, I try to keep the mindset of taking profits when the market makes them available. That line is straight out of Mark Douglas' "Trading in the Zone."
*If I am going to try to manage on a HTF, but the LTF has given an exit signal, I'll only leave 10-15% maximum on the table.
*I'll only do it when price has moved far enough from my entry that I can place my stop loss at the 50% Fibonacci retracement level and still be in the money. This gives price enough room to breathe and a decent chance at getting in the next wave of the move.

This method strikes a good balance for me, but I'm sure others have their own ideas and methods, which I'd love to hear!

[Grant]

morning...

trying to convert an m1 trade into an h1 is very very difficult to say the least....

i havent read the ebook in a long time but i am sure it says something like we are m5 traders looking for entries on m1...

So, if we follow that statement then we must surely manage our trades on m5. Well, yes and no is the answer for me. Since using the close half at 1 : 1 i have really tried to let my trades run as much as possible...

My SL management now looks like this once a PO triggers (remember i close half at 1 : 1):

Trail M1 aims or 5 same colour candles until SL is at BE then shift management to m5 chart
Trail m5 aims levels or 5 same colour candles

If an m5 BDB prints or there are 5 same colour candles then revert back down to the m1 chart...

trail on m1 using aims, BDBs and same colour candles for exit.


I hope that makes sense and you can see its a mix and match of m1/m5 charts.

cheers
Grant

will post a GU m1/m5 trade later that shows this...

[immy]

morning...

trying to convert an m1 trade into an h1 is very very difficult to say the least....

i havent read the ebook in a long time but i am sure it says something like we are m5 traders looking for entries on m1...

So, if we follow that statement then we must surely manage our trades on m5. Well, yes and no is the answer for me. Since using the close half at 1 : 1 i have really tried to let my trades run as much as possible...

My SL management now looks like this once a PO triggers (remember i close half at 1 : 1):

Trail M1 aims or 5 same colour candles until SL is at BE then shift management to m5 chart
Trail m5 aims levels or 5 same colour candles

If an m5 BDB prints or there are 5 same colour candles then revert back down to the m1 chart...

trail on m1 using aims, BDBs and same colour candles for exit.


I hope that makes sense and you can see its a mix and match of m1/m5 charts.

cheers
Grant

will post a GU m1/m5 trade later that shows this...

I agree Grant. Converting an M5 trade in to H1 is also very difficult. The fact remains, you gotta keep it as simple as possible. If you close part at 1:1, then that means you are willing to let it run as much as possible but you have to know how to manage your trade, and this above is a very good practical example. thanks Grant

[Dave]

Thanks for the reply Grant. What you've suggested is essentially what I have written too. Get to FT, if M5 is early in it's wave then manage on M5 until you get a BDB or divergence, then flick back to M1.

Thanks

[Dave]

Screen Shot 2014-01-23 at 7.00.42 PM.png