Isn't the nearest point where the 'region' begins really the target then? If you are watching a trade and you see some threatening PA will you be tempted to close out then and there, rather than sit it out - or would you bring your trailing stop up to this boundary.

With your trailing stop do you also have a target above, or solely trail out and just see how much the market is offering?

I've attached an example i've cherry picked to illustrate the concept:

- An area of support is identified at +-1.5330. When this area holds you enter long at 43

- You identify the prior major swing high as your target and place a target order under the peak at 85

- Price then chops around sideways. Through this period I would advise just leaving the stop where it originally was. Why? Because the trade has yet to prove you right or wrong. Yes it is painful to sit and watch the market chop sideways around your entry. But you have not been proved wrong yet. Leave the stop where it is.

- Once the market breaks up from that range, start looking for areas in the price action to trail our stop

- Now for the tricky part. The trade reaches 2 ticks under your profit target. Of course there are lots of options as to how to handle the trade at this point. But the trade has already gone 40 ticks in your direction. You were right. The trade was right. A set and forget approach would have you sitting back watching all that paper profit disappear. A more active approach would have you identifying areas in the price action to tighten your stop. Doing a juggling act of giving it enough space to possibly trade up to your target, but not so much that you give up too much if price retraces.

With regards to your last question, personally I have set targets in the market. I never just trail and see how far the market will go. I identify areas for the target based on price action with an intention of getting out at that point. If price continues further without me, that doesn't bother me.