ratio vs safety vs time (or 1:1 vs 1:3)

i guess this has been talked about in serval flamewar's already ...
however i would like to just get some opinions on this topic ..

the idea is simple .. assuming there is a somewhat working strategy in place.
add the component we can not control (the market itself)
gives us some sort of loose/win ratio .. guess we can all agree on that.

however if it comes to risc ratio .. i dont think 1:3 is somethings i would ever want to archive .. (sure i always happy if it happens) but in my setups i never actually plan to go this far.

first: going for a 1:3 ratio will put your money 2-3 times longer into the market. therefor your risc this is not going as planned is also 2-3 times higher.

so in my setup i aim for 1:1 only. at 1:1 my day is saved, i sell of half of the position .. and then let the rest of it run into my stoploss at some stage (which i manually move from resistance to resistance)

my initial idea to do that was basically build out of 3 things:
- 1:1 is much faster to archive .. and if i have a win ratio from 2:3 .. its alot les risc (financially) as aim to 1:3.
- in most cases .. on the 1:1 mark i also passed at least 1 lower TF resistance area .. which means my stop has moved as well .. (not necessary into the green area, but much close to the entry that it was resulting im less "loss" in a bad day)
- with selling off half the position at 1:1 basically anything can happen even 1 secound later a move in the opposite, and there would be at least breakeven, as i made the run to 1:1 with the double amount. (if the stoploss has not moved yet, my loss is just the commission, swap and slipage).

so the risk is basically limited to the time from Stoploss to 1:1, from there on its either breakeven, or make some $$$

does that makes any sense ? or is there a flaw in this idea ?

There's a flaw, you're assuming 1:3 takes longer than 1:1... So what if I get in with a 10 pip stop, but you wait 20 pips higher to enter (the long)... The time you have spent not in a trade you have spent waiting for the trade. Plus the late price has skewed your R, assuming we are using the same stop level and shooting for the same target.

Secondly if I get out where you enter then I close at 2:1... Has my time in the trade been 0?

hmm yes .. well okay .. i assumed in comparision both go in the trade the same time, so my 1:1 would be reached at much less time
and the risc, things go bad is less due to less exposure.
however i have to admit, moving after 1:1 the stoploss is not always a good idea.

thats was my tought behind it ... as this is more a general thing unrelated to any strategy.

but assuming the stame strategy is aplied, the chance not reaching 1:3 is much higher than the chance not reaching 1:2 or 1:1

i'm not 100% sure this is true, thats why i started this thread.

just in my mind .. i would assume that the failure rate is higher .. because the exposal of the money is longer.

on the other side however, if the win/loose ratio is the same, then a 1:3 is of course better, as with 1:1 3 trades (and the exposal of 3 times the risk) would be required to get the same result.