My refutation of the arguments I alluded to, are as follows:
"Exits are more important than entries because Van Tharp (or some well known author) says so".
Explanation here.
"Exits are where you close the trade and bank the money".
P/L is the difference in pips between entry and exit. Mathematically, entry has just as much bearing on P/L as exit.
"Two traders enter at the same level, one buys and the other sells. Both can profit, depending on how they exit; therefore entry is inconsequential, and exit is key".
This is true only if neither trader uses stoplosses (see my comments below on floating losses). If both use stoplosses an equal distance from the entry level, then one who made the 'poorer' choice of entry will likely get stopped out before the other.
"If you exit every winning trade when $20 ahead, and every losing trade when $10 down, it's obvious that you'll win in the long run".
This doesn't take win rate into account. Everything else being equal, taking 2:1 RR trades will result in twice as many losses as wins (actually more, if we consider costs).
"You can enter anywhere, because if you hold onto any floating loss long enough, it will eventually return to profit".
...... or you get margin called, whichever happens first. The idea that "a loss is not a loss until the trade is closed" is very dangerously flawed. Floating losses are very real.
"It's impossible to predict price, therefore entry doesn't matter, and the only way to profit is through your exits".
If it's impossible to 'predict price', or at least act on the balance of probability, then it's impossible to gain an edge from either entries or exits.
More thoughts on entries, exits etc:
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...77#post1452677
http://www.forexfactory.com/showpost...511#post198511
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...01#post3113701
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...22#post2444822
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=71674