2025-12-27 00:24:55

That late-night vibration at 2 a.m. directly woke me up from my sleep. On the screen was a screenshot of an account sent by a long-time follower who has been paying attention to me, making my eyes instantly widen—originally a $5,000 account balance, now only $0.01, almost completely wiped out.

Followed by his helpless rant: "Long position over 10x, but it only dropped 3 points and was gone. I clearly saw the right direction, how do I explain this?"

Carefully reviewing his trading record, I was speechless—$4,800 all in, no stop-loss set, not even a penny of "escape fund" left in the account. Can this still be called trading? To put it plainly, it’s treating the market like a gamble—win doubles, lose everything, even your underwear.

I’ve seen too many tragedies like this over the past few decades. There’s a guy with $30,000 capital, who directly piled on 20x leverage to chase the rally, and when the market had a 5% pullback, he got liquidated; another person naively thought that 10x leverage was "very safe," and ended up being swept out by a single spike.

Talking about liquidation, everyone likes to blame the high leverage. But here’s a harsh reality most people don’t want to face: what truly sends an account to the grave is never the leverage itself, but the courage and desire to "bet how much money."

**Leverage is just a double-edged sword; position control is the moat**

Through years of trading practice and tracking thousands of real accounts, I’ve gradually seen a market truth: leverage is merely an amplifier—it can magnify your profits, but also your losses. But the key to determining whether an account lives or dies always comes down to position management.

A simple comparison makes this clear. The same $10,000 account, if the follower puts $9,500 into a 10x leverage trade, just a 3% move against him will wipe out the entire account. But if he only invests 2% of his capital ($200) per trade, no matter how high the leverage, the risk remains tightly controlled within a manageable range.

The difference isn’t about the size of leverage, but whether the trader’s "position control" string is taut or not.

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
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

OnchainDetective

· 12-27 00:52

According to on-chain data tracking, this guy's trading pattern is obviously a typical gambler's mentality... $4,800 all-in, zero stop-loss, zero escape funds. This operational sequence itself reveals some suspicious fund behavior characteristics. After multiple analyses and assessments, the real issue isn't the leverage itself, but the desire to "dare to gamble"—that's the real behind-the-scenes culprit that sends the account to the grave.

View OriginalReply0

gas_fee_therapist

· 12-27 00:49

It's the same old trick, full position with high leverage, no wonder you're wiped out. Honestly, it's just a gambler's mentality; you only feel good when you go all in. Nine out of ten people can't escape this trap; proper position management really saves lives. Seeing this guy put everything on 4800, I knew the ending—no stop loss, just giving it away. High leverage isn't the main culprit; your greed is. 2% position management isn't new, but how many can actually do it? Liquidation is the price of greed, nothing else.

View OriginalReply0

GweiTooHigh

· 12-27 00:34

Basically, it's still greed. You have to go all-in to be able to sleep peacefully. --- $5000 lost overnight, it hurts to watch. This is the result of no stop loss. --- Daring to go all-in with 10x leverage, no wonder getting liquidated, just market tuition. --- It's always like this. People always think about going all-in to turn things around, but never consider stop-loss. --- Really, position management is easy to say but extremely difficult to do. Most people die because of this. --- Tired of hearing about 2% position management, but it is indeed effective. The problem is no one wants to take it slow. --- Looking at the right direction doesn't help. Going all-in is playing with fire, only a matter of time. --- This guy probably has never thought about risk control. Pure gambler mentality. --- Leverage itself is not a problem; the issue is that human desires are never satisfied. --- Receiving such screenshots at 2 a.m. is terrifying to think about. It’s like going back to the pre-liberation days. --- 20x leverage chasing the rally? How is this guy thinking? It’s a miracle if he doesn’t get wrecked. --- Position control = boredom? Yeah, but those who aren’t bored all end up bankrupt.

View OriginalReply0

BridgeTrustFund

· 12-27 00:27

Oh no, another all-in sucker... It makes me feel sorry for him. --- To be honest, those who don't set stop-losses deserve to get liquidated; it's not the leverage's fault. --- 10x leverage and going all-in? Bro, this isn't trading, you're gambling with your life. --- Position control is truly a moat; smart people have already made money, while fools are still chasing highs and selling lows. --- This kind of newbie is constantly generating daily... After seeing so much, you become numb. --- Zero stop-loss? I just want to ask, what's in your head, soy milk? --- Leverage itself isn't a problem; the issue is you don't have the brains to control it. --- $5,000 gone in an instant, this guy probably will get beaten to death by his family. --- Seeing these tragedies every day, there's really no way to save them; some people are destined to lose money. --- Clearly seeing the right direction but still getting liquidated? That means you didn't see it right at all; survivor bias is at work.

View OriginalReply0