2026-01-07 10:22:13

This afternoon, I successfully entered ETH according to the established trading plan. This operation can be considered a relatively standard one.

Position setup: place the stop-loss at 3098, with a maximum loss of 100U before exiting. The target is set at 3400; if it hits, I will earn 200U. I think a 1:2 risk-reward ratio feels quite comfortable.

To be honest, trading is really about dealing with probability odds. You need to be clear about your trading logic—what conditions must be met to decisively enter a trade. But the most challenging part here is—whether your trade is right or wrong doesn’t ultimately depend on whether you make money or lose money, but on whether you strictly follow your trading plan.

Many people get stuck here: when they make money, they think the system is fine; when they lose money, they start doubting themselves. Actually, what you should do is execute signals like a machine, letting the data speak.

ETH0,36%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

8 Likes

Reward
8
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NoodlesOrTokens

· 01-10 05:17

Stop loss at 100, take profit at 200. I like this ratio, just worried I can't execute it.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoGoldmine

· 01-09 06:44

A 1:2 profit and loss ratio is indeed comfortable, but the key is whether you can survive and come out alive. My main concern is how your logic has performed in terms of win rate over the past 30 days. Following the rules is more important than anything else; most people fail because they change the rules. Interestingly, many people change the rules very quickly when they are losing. This idea is good, but a deeper question is—how reliable are your signals in the first place? Data is important, but the quality of the data is even more important. Machine execution of signals sounds simple, but it actually requires quite strong psychological resilience. I have seen too many people lose because they changed their mind in the last second. Holding onto a 200 profit and 100 loss ratio is key, but it depends on whether the sample size is large enough. Small samples can easily mislead people.

View OriginalReply0

ShibaMillionairen't

· 01-07 16:49

1:2 profit and loss ratio is indeed comfortable, but the key is to endure without changing the plan --- It's easy to say, but who can truly act like a machine when losing money --- I've heard this logic too many times, and most of the time the mindset collapses in the end --- A $100 stop loss sounds sophisticated, but I don't know how many times one can stick to it --- The difficulty lies in execution; everyone can say the system is fine when making money --- A 1:2 trade sounds good, but I'm worried about frequent stop losses wearing down the principal --- The machine's execution of that theory is correct, but human nature can't get past this hurdle --- The key is whether we can reach 3400 in this wave, don't turn back halfway again --- Stop loss at 100, target 200, sounds like a conditioned reflex, brother --- Strong execution ability is one thing, but whether the market gives opportunities is another

View OriginalReply0

LiquidatedThrice

· 01-07 10:50

1:2 risk-reward ratio, this is what a serious trader looks like, unlike some people who go all in and gamble Execution is the only hard currency in trading; those who can stick to their system are already financially free Exactly, some people think they're geniuses when they make money, and change strategies when they lose, how can that be stable This is the kind of sharing I want to see, no fancy technical analysis, just pure trading discipline Trading is really a psychological game, a hundred times more difficult than technical skills

View OriginalReply0

GasBankrupter

· 01-07 10:46

The 1:2 risk-reward ratio setting is really comfortable, just worried that I might change my mind halfway through execution.

View OriginalReply0

DaoGovernanceOfficer

· 01-07 10:46

nah the whole "just execute like a machine" thing sounds good empirically speaking but the data actually suggests most traders lack proper feedback loops to validate their thesis. where's the statistical rigor here?

Reply0

AllTalkLongTrader

· 01-07 10:45

1:2 risk-reward ratio is indeed comfortable, just afraid of trembling hands during execution 2. It sounds good, but when it actually loses money, who doesn't doubt themselves? The key is to survive longer 3. Robot-like execution? Easy to say, but when the market pulls back, they start making up stories and finding reasons 4. This trading logic sounds fine, but it depends on how long you can stick to it without getting wiped out 5. Earning 200 and losing 100 with this ratio assumes you can really get to 3098 and come out, but the market isn't that obedient 6. Dealing with probability and odds, sounds like gambler talk haha 7. Strictly following the plan? More like strictly controlling your mindset, which is the hardest part 8. Data speaks for itself, but only if your data model really works 9. Most people can't do it, including those who post trading screenshots every day 10. Many people are stuck here, and some get in without any plan at all

View OriginalReply0

SellLowExpert

· 01-07 10:41

A 1:2 profit and loss ratio is indeed comfortable, but I'm just worried that I might still get nervous during execution. Execution is really the Achilles' heel for most people; when making money, they think they're a genius. It's the same standard operation again; it sounds simple but is really hard to do. Machine-like execution sounds easy, but in real trading, greed takes over. Stick strictly to the plan; the simplest principles are the hardest to stick to. A ratio of earning 200 and losing 100 is quite rational; the key is whether you can maintain your mindset.

View OriginalReply0