Not sure there's a 'right' answer to pyramiding. Some do it, others don't. I use it occasionally if I enter on a less convincing signal, and then add to the position when it's confirmed as working, but more often I simply won't take a trade if I'm not wholly confident. I think theory points to pyramiding as worthwhile, but like you, human nature can get in the way of that, and if I think a position is a good'un I'll want to be invested as soon as possible.
CC's reply (8-10%) highlights some other factors, which in theory shouldn't make a difference, but in practice do - if your bank is pretty small, and 1-2% positions aren't going to make any difference to your overall wealth, then you're going to get sucked into bigger trades. However, I think that if you examined the 90% of traders who are commonly accepted to be losers, a very high proportion of them would be people who were under-capitalised and placed inappropriately high stakes on each trade.
CC is right that the chances of 10 successive losing trades is low, but the probability of, say, a 50% drawdown over a period of time from which it would be hard to recover is far less so. Even 5 losers in a row, which would halve your bank, is a 1% probability under CC's stats. 1% for a day-trader is going to happen every few weeks or months.
Maybe CC's been lucky, maybe he's exceptionally good at spotting opportunities, but running your money management on the basis of how much money you want to make from a fixed bank looks like the road to ruin to me.
