➡ Watch the Full Podcast Episode Here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fgxfqBRE2c0.html EPISODE SPONSOR → JIGSAW TRADING ✅ Free Professional Order Flow Training: go.tradacc.com/Jigsaw-Order-Flow
Y'all are missing badly in these comments, lol. You will hit 1:1 80% of the time easily if you can actually trade. If this is not true for you, you are not a good trader at all. Go and backtest your 3:1 strategy moving your S/L to 1:1 when in profit 1:1.5. Journal how many times you hit your 1:3. Journal how many times the trade misses your 1:3. Finally journal how many times you actually hit 1:1 while missing your 1:3. You will discover capturing that 1:1 happens on almost every setup even when the 1:3 is not actualized. ;
@@godsoracle1212 I use a 3 to 1 system daytrading Dow Jones Futures and I have a 45% win rate. Let me tell you that I am just killing it. 20 trades at 45% win rate. Risking $1000 per trade 9 wins at 3R = $27,000 11 losses at -1R = -$11,000 Net +$16,000 or +16R Far better than a crappy 1:1 where you need MINIMUM 60% just to make any money, let alone decent sized money.
I love the fact that most of the people on the comments are triggered by “bad risk to reward” concepts. But let’s remember that 90% of traders are failing to make money consistently in the markets. Thereby further validating the value of the concept that Barrett is talking about. Just think about it, if everyone is doing the same thing of chasing high targets and at the same time no one is really profitable from it, then logic dictates that using an inverse approach should give you more favorable results
This are true statements when Traders daytrade with 100 - 300 pips SL. Most traders are lazy and they don't filter out to improve their niche/edge. I consider traders as data analysts and risk managers. There are 3 to 5 opportunity on each instrument per week that can give 3:1 trades at least. 30 pips SL and 95 pips TP and these setups are predictable on M15 timeframe. Anyway... that's his opinion. Controversial but we respect that. Thanks for the quality of content Korbs. That's very entertaining. Wish you good 2024.
LISTEN TO THIS MAN, BEFORE 1:1 I DIDN’T WIN A SINGLE TRADE FOR MONTHS EVEN WHEN I KNEW THE TREND, IT WOULD ALWAYS REVERSE AND STOP ME OUT BUT WOULD ALWAYS HIT THAT 1:1 TP
90% of traders fail. Whats the number 1 thing most traders want? A high win rate. What is one thing majority of traders cant do? Hold trades for big targets and or add to a winning position. Logic dictates that the bigger targets allow for more room for error. 3 losses are back to break even with 1 win.
If it was as easy as a high risk reward ratio there would be a lot more successful traders. There are a lot more potential wins per day on lower reward trades. It kind of balances out if the trader knows what they’re doing.
3 to 1 is good for some symbols but obviously not all.. like everything it depends what you are doing. Also it depends how you define 3 to 1 if you mean you will always take the loss at the full 1 then yeah I agree that's not that practical, but 3 to 1 is fine if you frequently get out of trades that are not going as planned, at a much lower loss than 1 or at break even
I've been tracking about 30 different management systems over 2.5 years.. risking 1 for a reward of 2, all or nothing is the most profitable over that time compared to the others. 1 to 1 and 1 to .5 are towards the bottom of the list
Flawed assessment. Most trades are 1:1 RR I agree however 1:1 at 40, 50, and 60 win % are still losing $ or at best breaking even. This is why interviewing traders is a joke. He’s just crafting a narrative. His win % would be roughly 70% to start making money risking 1:1. Plain and simple I would only interview traders who make their tax return public.
your missing the biggest aspect of risk which is position sizing. A common theme I hear among long time career traders is that you need to know when to go big, go small, or sit it out. A high rr and high win rate is insignificant if you are sized tiny.
Incorrect. Yes, obvious math will tell anyone profitability is impossible with the 40-50% figures on 1/1 he mentions. But most discount brokerages give at least as low as $4 commissions on Minis. A common scalping target for NQ is 5 points. 1/1 puts breakeven parity at 52%. A 57% Winrate from just about 13 quick 5 points scalps a day (very common for a lot of scalpers to place 20 or more) would net the equivalent of an average per capita income in the U.S. That's from trading ONLY ONE contract. I have routinely had $400-500 days scalping 1/1 at 59-63% Winrates.
@@utubeskreename9516 I trade NQ full time for a living and average around 40 - 50 points a week. My RR varies from 1:1 to 1:7 and I promise you there’s absolutely 0% chance that’s possible targeting 5 points on a 1:1
@@LifestyleTradr that doesn’t make any sense….i trade NQ full time for a living and you only size up when you have an A+ trade which entails correctly assessing EV. Do you understand how difficult that is? Also the only way it’s possible for what he is saying to actually work is scaling in and scaling out. It’s not possible any other way from a mathematical standpoint.
Trading the NQ is one of toughest markets to trade but most profitable. If you trade one mini, you can burp and make or lose $200-$300, just like that. Set ups are key. Traders shouldn't be in trades long while trading the NQ.
![3:1 Risk-Reward is Bullsh*t - Bran Barrett [Full-Time Pro Futures Trader Since 2011]](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
