Skip to main content
Track Pre-trade checklist
54 / 135
Search the archiveLibrary
Library

2001issue C041

Review the operator before you rewrite the plan

After a severe losing period, the first step is an objective review of plan-adherence. Editorial reading: score the operator against the written entry, exit, size and abstention checklist before you touch the system, so an adverse-run is not treated as a reason to abandon a still-sound procedure.

  • The prescribed first step after a severe losing period is an objective review of whether the operator followed the written plan.
  • Plan-adherence is what counts as trading correctly: intended triggers, specified loss cuts, and management inside the plan. A loss under those conditions is an adverse-run, not personal failure.
  • A process-breach, including acting early or late, adding unauthorized size, or trading something unknown, is operator failure and should be posted as a breach-reminder before the next session.
  • Operator-plan-split keeps the judgements apart: score the trader by checklist compliance, then judge whether the plan is still performing as designed before you resume the daily procedure.
Entries in this reading2 entries
Current trackPre-trade checklist245 readingsTrading psychology process376 readings

Start with the written plan

After a severe losing period, the prescribed first step is an objective review of whether the operator followed the written plan. Trading correctly is defined as plan-adherence: taking intended triggers, cutting losses as specified, and managing the situation within that plan.

An adverse-run is not a personal verdict

If the plan was followed and money was still lost, the episode is classified as an adverse-run of circumstance rather than personal failure. Capital sufficient to absorb expected losses, appropriate size, and taking the planned losses are treated as plan parameters that make a bad run survivable.

Full plan-adherence still allows a long consecutive string of losses. Treating that string as proof that the operator is a loser is described as a crippling error.

A process-breach is operator failure

Acting early or late, adding more size than the plan allows, or trading something unknown are process-breaches and are counted as operator failure. After a process-breach, the recovery procedure is to recheck whether the plan is still performing as designed and to post the specific mistake as a breach-reminder before the next session.

States that should trigger a review

Self-abuse, isolation, distrust of one's own ideas, and hostility toward the market are listed as post-blow-up states that should trigger the objective review rather than more trading.

Split the operator from the plan

Once a plan-intact losing streak has been identified, the remaining task is an operator-plan-split. Judge the trader by checklist compliance and judge the plan by whether it is still performing as designed, not by a single streak of profit or loss. If the plan remains sound, resume the daily procedure.

Educational research material, not investment advice. Historical source context does not establish present-day performance.
54 of 135 in the Pre-trade checklist track
20011-3 pp.Next on Pre-trade checklistCritique of the informal trading pauseTraders who stop executing often justify the stall personally, even when comparable obstacles do not stop others from operating.
All readings on this track · 135 readings
  1. 1987Pair each checklist step with its decision state
  2. 1987Position secrecy as decision-process control
  3. 1987When profits break the trading process
  4. 1988Treat action-seeking as a veto before any signal
  5. 1988Entry, exit, and abstention as one practiced procedure
  6. 1988Making inner conflict a testable trading rule
  7. 1988The chart is only half the trading procedure
  8. 1988Negotiate conflicting parts before the signal
  9. 1989Commitment turns trading rules into one procedure
  10. 1989Confidence, discipline and the fit of a trading procedure
  11. 1990Encoding expert hunches into a mechanical trading loop
  12. 1991The consecutive-loss halt as the trading system
  13. 1991A fuzzy membership checklist for trade signals
  14. 1991Overconfidence as a skipped pre-trade checklist
  15. 1991A source-reliability audit for trade signals
  16. 1991Shared rules fail without an execution checklist
  17. 1991The daily study block as a low-risk checklist
  18. 1992A bear-market loss review that rewrites the pre-trade checklist
  19. 1993Unspoken beliefs that veto system rules
  20. 1993Why a mechanical system beats betting harder when the story looks cheaper
  21. 1993A usable process over a perfect trader standard
  22. 1993Remold the decision-map after a traumatic trade
  23. 1994Keep entry, exit and sit-out as one procedure
  24. 1994Pre-trade gates for belief and state
  25. 1994Known failure points inside the yen triangle phase checklist
  26. 1994When a comfort ceiling, not market state, is the failure mode
  27. 1994Trading commitment as a balanced decision process
  28. 1994Constructing a pre-trade discipline checklist
  29. 1995Futures systems start with whether to trade
  30. 1995Stopping points as checklist and stop failures
  31. 1995When analysis and execution must become one procedure
  32. 1995A decision-process database from analyst to trader
  33. 1995Decisive execution as one tested procedure
  34. 1996The unfinished-system trap in simple decision rules
  35. 1996When risk breaks practiced system execution
  36. 1996Treat the mechanical signal as a draft, not a decision
  37. 1996Critique of decision states that break system rules
  38. 1996State-gate checklist for trading decisions
  39. 1996Personality-fit rules before earned intuition
  40. 1996The commitment gap as a testable decision process
  41. 1996Test decision style as one trading procedure
  42. 1997Mechanical trading before subjective judgment
  43. 1997Belief checklists that invalidate mechanical systems
  44. 1998Mechanical rules against mindtraps
  45. 1999The profit target as a trading discipline lens
  46. 1999When mechanical rules replace judgment in the trade process
  47. 1999Trading discipline as one testable procedure
  48. 1999Daily pre-open map as one procedure
  49. 2000Session veto from daily readiness
  50. 2000Anger buildup as an untested system input
  51. 2000Construct separate research and live-trade question checklists
  52. 2000Operator-state as a first-class trading rule
  53. 2001Day-trading rules need a pre-trade decision process
  54. 2001Review the operator before you rewrite the plan
  55. 2001Critique of the informal trading pause
  56. 2001Specificity turns wishes into checkable trading rules
  57. 2002The pre-entry plan that locks exits and size
  58. 2002Risk identity as a pre-trade system gate
  59. 2002When elapsed time rewrites trade rules
  60. 2002One written system, faster exits, and the belief gate
  61. 2003Countable decision trees for entry and abstention
  62. 2003Constructing a pre-trade stop and review procedure
  63. 2004Psychological wounds that override a tested system
  64. 2004A hot streak does not retire the trading checklist
  65. 2005Why mechanical trade plans fail without execution discipline
  66. 2005Resentment as a construction input for trade decisions
  67. 2005A daytrade as one written procedure
  68. 2006Write the pre-trade plan as one procedure before entry
  69. 2006When a winning streak makes the trade checklist optional
  70. 2007An entry needs a pre-trade risk bound and a post-trade debrief
  71. 2007A pre-session futures plan that locks entries, exits, and stops
  72. 2007Maxims fail without one testable procedure
  73. 2007Personality-fit and holding horizon before the pre-trade checklist
  74. 2008Push-button systems versus a testable decision process
  75. 2008Written rules omit the operator and the implicit filters
  76. 2008A Pre-trade checklist before emotion takes over
  77. 2008System design between the mechanical black box and checklist judgment
  78. 2008Trade history as a checklist for entry, exit, and abstention
  79. 2008Mechanical rules without a decision process
  80. 2008Parable checklists for entry, exit and abstention
  81. 2010Keep rule-based entries clear of news bias
  82. 2010Self-control zones before the pre-trade checklist
  83. 2010Treat the pair-desk day as one testable procedure
  84. 2010Use a five-factor checklist instead of pattern labels
  85. 2010Listed currency futures versus spot forex as a pre-trade venue checklist
  86. 2010Rule overload, unfinishable checklists, and tight stops
  87. 2010Pre-trade checklist versus automatic stops
  88. 2010Skipping signals after a losing streak is a new system
  89. 2010Stand aside until the relationship breaks
  90. 2010A software catalog fails the checklist without one testable procedure
  91. 2011Checklist rules versus unwritten indicator judgment
  92. 2011The handoff test for self-coached trading plans
  93. 2011Unify locate status, written rules, and self-talk on one checklist
  94. 2012A pocket card and a setup-chart as the session-plan
  95. 2012Close system construction with a review checklist
  96. 2012A pre-trade checklist versus in-trade emotion
  97. 2013The ten-question alignment gate when traders lose the path
  98. 2013A stuck-point audit for stalled trading decisions
  99. 2013Why rule-based entries need false-trigger checks
  100. 2013One procedure for liquidity rules and abstention
  101. 2013The month-open window is unfinished without cash default and a substitution checklist
  102. 2014Waiting fails when the pre-trade checklist is too wide
  103. 2014A swing procedure with a checklist, layered stops, and an emotion handoff
  104. 2014System design as a critique of forecast-worship
  105. 2014Consultant hiring as an accept-or-abstain checklist
  106. 2014One procedure for entry, exit and abstention
  107. 2014A trading system that cannot decide before the chart opens
  108. 2014The checklist veto when tools override the plan
  109. 2014Write the holding-period style before any daytrading rules
  110. 2015A pre-trade checklist when volatility turns rules into panic
  111. 2015A checklist, psychology gate, and moving-average procedure
  112. 2015Write forex entry and sit-out rules before you score the links
  113. 2015Daily if-then checklists versus year-ahead market forecasts
  114. 2015Workstation readiness in the pre-trade execution checklist
  115. 2015An unprepared trade fails the pre-trade checklist
  116. 2015Evaluate a system with one pre-trade checklist
  117. 2015The pre-trade checklist as one testable procedure
  118. 2015News-aware forex process with defined stops
  119. 2016Slow thinking over gut feel in complex markets
  120. 2016When a market-structure story rewrites a checklist yes
  121. 2017Constructing an options trading-plan from a self-inventory
  122. 2017A price-first checklist for noncooperative market games
  123. 2017A pre-trade risk checklist versus profit-first thinking
  124. 2018A forex onboarding ladder is not a decision process
  125. 2018Pre-trade regret scripts for entry and abstention
  126. 2018Audit the plan while the tape stays forgiving
  127. 2018Constructing a sortable pre-trade checklist
  128. 2018Forex myths that break a testable decision process
  129. 2018Why trading checklists must beat inherited confidence
  130. 2019Leverage as a pre-trade gate in mechanical systems
  131. 2019Critique of impulse trading as a testable system
  132. 2020One checklist for breakout entry, stops, and sitting out
  133. 2020A continuity checklist for a blank Sunday-night system desk
  134. 2020After an extended bar, the checklist must still be able to refuse
  135. 2020Write one procedure before outsourcing system decisions
By fieldDecision process416 readingsBy year2001117 readings
All 245 readings tagged Pre-trade checklist
Also on Pre-trade checklist5 readings
1985Event-class hazards and pre-trade survival checks1986Construct a decision procedure that revises itself1986Two gates for setup and operator readiness1987Pair each checklist step with its decision state1987Position secrecy as decision-process control