The problem, IMO is employing stop-losses on highly speculative...

The problem, IMO is employing stop-losses on highly speculative micro cap stocks. Not sure I understand why one would want to do that when it makes it so easy to be picked-off. Human nature being what it is, the triggers are pretty predictable, and they then set off a cascade. Having published stop losses as per RS is alleged to have done just makes it that much easier. Having been burnt before numerous times, I find that keeping my stop-losses at the more aggressive (riskier) setting and keeping it in my head keeps me in the game longer. If the research was good enough to start with, and if nothing has happened to change that research, then staying in the game longer is the only way to make money (though clearly the downside risks are greater). IMO. Not sure this is the neck of the woods to play in if your risk appetite will not tolerate 50% swings or more. Just sayin'.