You take a setup, get stopped, and the level does exactly what you expected a minute later. Re-entering can be correct — a good idea with bad timing is still a good idea. The danger is that a stop-out fires the urge to immediately pile back in to “get it back,” which is revenge, not analysis.
The rule: re-enter on a fresh trigger, not a feeling
A disciplined re-entry requires the same thing your first entry did: a clean, fresh trigger at your level — another rejection, another reclaim, another confirmation. If the setup re-presents itself on its own merits and you'd take it from scratch, that's a re-entry. If you're jumping back in because you're annoyed you got stopped, that's tilt wearing a plan's clothes.
Ask one question before you re-enter: would I take this trade if I hadn't just been stopped? If no, it's revenge.
Manage the risk of a second try
Cap re-entries. One re-entry on a genuinely fresh trigger is reasonable; a third and fourth attempt on the same idea usually means the read is wrong or the tape isn't cooperating — time for the two-strike rule. Consider slightly smaller size on the re-entry, and keep the same defined stop; don't widen it to “give it room” because you already lost once.
When not to re-enter
Don't re-enter if the stop-out was information — a break that invalidated the whole idea (a put wall that broke, a failed regime). Don't re-enter into tilt. And don't re-enter just because the level is “still there” without a new trigger. The point of a plan is that the entry criteria don't change because your P&L did. NoVo enforces this structurally: it acts on setups, not on your frustration, and its default-Stop keeps a stop-out from cascading into a string of emotional re-entries.