Maybe this is what you need to read when you feel like something’s wrong with you
The Deeper Reasons Why You Do What You Do:
(very long...do you have the patience to read it?)
In 1996 I sat with a bank teller a few hours after she’d had a gun pointed at her face. She wasn’t thinking about the robber anymore. She was thinking about her father, who used to raise his voice the same way the robber had.
Nothing about her rational, adult mind believed her father was in that bank. Her nervous system disagreed, and her nervous system doesn’t take votes from the rational mind. It just fires.
I spent years doing that kind of work, sitting with people in the minutes and days after something had overwhelmed their capacity to stay regulated. Many bank robberies, over a hundred of them for one institution alone.
A high profile incident at a naval airbase (also early in my career), where I had no time to consult theory and had to learn on the spot what happens to a human being when the ground disappears from under them.
Special forces operators, who taught me something I now consider the single most important sentence in performance psychology:
You do not rise to the level of your intentions, you fall to the level of your conditioning.
I didn’t walk into trading thinking any of that would apply. It applies completely.
A trader staring at an account that’s forty minutes underwater is not having a bad trading day. Often they are having a nervous system event, and the market on the screen is not the only market they’re trading.
There’s a second market running at the same time, built from every threat response, every old fear, every piece of conditioning they’ve ever absorbed.
I call it the Inner Market.
You don’t see the external market as it is. You see it as you are. And when those two markets disagree, the Inner Market usually wins, because it was installed first and it was installed harder.
In my 1:1 coaching work I've learned I\tt can be helpful to imagine two systems running inside you at all times.
One is conscious, slow, and can hold roughly one problem at a time. It’s the part of you narrating this sentence.
The other runs everything else, your heart rate, your balance, the tightness in your chest right before you hit sell a half second too late.
That second system doesn’t check in with you first. It’s efficient precisely because it skips that step, which is also exactly why it’s so hard to argue with once it’s running a pattern you no longer want.
This is why post -it notes, promises made to oneself, the great trading psychology book you just read......is forgotten or ignored so easily.
You do not rise to the level of your intentions, you fall to the level of your conditioning.
This is why willpower is such a poor tool for changing trading behavior.
You can decide with total sincerity, the night before, that tomorrow you will size correctly and wait for your setup. And you can still watch yourself chase a move by 9:42 the next morning.
That’s not weak character. That’s architecture. A small, effortful, easily depleted system trying to override a fast automatic one that’s had years of repetition behind it. It’s an unfair fight, and pretending it’s a fair one is where most discretionary traders lose the most money.
Where the Programming Actually Gets Written
Most of what’s driving that automatic system was installed early, often before you had the verbal capacity to argue with it. “I’m not enough.” “It’s dangerous to want something.” “If I get comfortable, it gets taken away.”
And staying with the familiar, even if it costs you, is the nervous system doing its job - new territory gets flagged as unfamiliar, and it carries a unique unease under the surface...this is why so many traders give back the profits made over the past 3 weeks.
Back to the early devlopment:
A child doesn’t get to reason through a painful, new, or unfamiliar experience and file it correctly. There’s no internal editor yet capable of saying, wait, is this actually true?
So it gets absorbed as fact, and it gets built into the architecture of a brain that is, at that age, unusually plastic and unusually literal.
That matters for you as a trader because the belief didn’t arrive with a label on it that says “childhood material, does not apply to markets.”
It just shows up as the flinch before you take profit too early, or the freeze right when a position needs managing, or the certainty that you personally are the kind of person who blows up good accounts.
The nervous system doesn’t file these things by category. It files them by intensity.
Neurons That Fire Together, Wire Together
This is a long post...and if you got this far...if there's one key idea to keep from all of this, keep this one. It’s called Hebbian learning, and it’s about as solid as anything gets in neuroscience.
When two neurons fire together repeatedly, the connection between them physically strengthens.
And that cuts in your favor as much as against you. If a pattern got built through repetition, it can be rebuilt through repetition.
There’s no rare gift required and no secret shortcut that skips the reps.
The brain keeps reorganizing itself across the entire lifespan. Neuroscientists Antonio Damasio and Lisa Feldman Barrett have both, from different angles, made the case that the brain isn’t a passive recorder of the world at all. It’s a prediction machine, constantly forecasting what should happen next based on what it already believes, then filtering incoming reality through that forecast.
Which means two traders can watch the same price action and have two completely different nervous systems tell them two completely different stories about what it means and what to do.
The Gap Between the Event and the Reaction
There’s a hard line between two kinds of memory. Explicit memory is what you’d testify to, the facts, the dates, the words someone used. Implicit memory is procedural and emotional, mostly out of reach of direct recall, which is why a setup that merely resembles an old losing trade can spike your heart rate with no conscious memory of the original loss attached to it at all.
That’s the mismatch behind a sentence I hear constantly in this work:
“I know what I should do, but just can't do it"
You’re not being irrational. You’re running an implicit prediction your conscious mind never got invited to review.
Real change starts in the half second between the trigger and the automatic reaction. Widen that gap even slightly, notice the trigger, notice the thought, the bodily sensation, the feeling, and you get leverage over a pattern that used to run you completely.
Skip that gap and you get the same result you’ve always gotten.
This is also part of reason for keeping a written trading journal that goes past P&L, one that tracks the internal state around the trade, not just the entries and exits.
Externalizing a thought onto paper drags implicit material into a system that’s actually capable of evaluating it.
That’s not a soft, optional add-on to trading psychology. It’s the mechanism.
Identity Beats Strategy, Every Time
And It's why most attempts at fixing trading behavior don’t work.
A trader tries to bolt a new rule onto an old identity.
Three weeks of discipline, then a snap back to the exact old pattern. If somewhere underneath the strategy you still believe “I’m not a disciplined trader,” or "I am not enough", the nervous system will keep steering you back toward evidence that confirms it, because confirming existing beliefs is close to the entire job of a predictive brain.
Change the underlying belief about who you are as a trader, and the behavior stops being a daily fight you have to win. It starts matching who you’ve actually decided you are.
State Comes Before Insight
The brain is not equally open to new input at every moment. A dysregulated nervous system, flooded, hypervigilant, defended, is not in a state where new learning lands.
This is precisely what I saw over and over in early in my career....crisis work, in the bank robbery debriefs, the military threat assessment work, in the sessions with people who’d just been through something that overwhelmed their capacity to stay regulated.
You cannot install a new belief into a system that’s actively defending itself. States of genuine calm, focused attention, reduced defensiveness, make the mind receptive in a way a flooded, threat state simply can’t match.
Emotion is what encodes a belief, not repetition on its own. A belief absorbed during real fear, shame, or humiliation gets burned in fast, sometimes in a single exposure, because emotional arousal amplifies memory consolidation.
This is why one brutal drawdown can outweigh months of clean, boring, profitable trading in a trader’s actual sense of who they are. And it’s why a new belief has to be paired with real felt conviction to have any chance of competing with the old one.
Flat repetition doesn’t stand a chance against a belief that arrived soaked in feeling.
It's also why affirmations don't work so well for traders.
Evidence Does the Work Affirmation Can’t
Telling yourself “I’m a disciplined trader” while your last six months of trade logs say otherwise doesn’t just fail to help. It can backfire, because the nervous system checks new statements against the evidence bank it’s already built and flags anything that doesn’t match.
What actually works - what I see in my coaching practice and it shows up consistently in the clinical literature - is building an evidence case. Naming the belief you want installed, then going back through your own trading history and finding the specific, concrete moments that already support it.
Ten real instances where you did hold the position, did size correctly, did wait for your setup, do more rewiring work than a hundred repetitions of a sentence you don’t yet believe.
This Takes Longer Than You Want It To
Structurally embedded change takes at least several weeks (sometimes longer) of consistent practice, not a weekend and not a single insight, however good that insight felt in the moment.
That’s frustrating to hear if you’re carrying a pattern that’s many years old and hoping this week is the one where it finally resolves. But it was built through thousands of small repeated moments spread across years, and undoing it runs on the same physical rules.
The genuinely useful part of that fact is that the timeline is knowable. It isn’t an indefinite wait for a feeling to fade on its own. It’s a process with a method and a reasonably predictable arc, provided you actually do the work instead of just understanding it.
This is where skilled 1:1 coaching comes in.
You’ve spent hundreds of hours training your read on price. Almost nobody spend seven a fraction of that time training the nervous system that is actually reading the price.
#selfimprovement #traderperformance #tradingpsychology $ES_F $NQ_F $QQQ $SPY
7
Just finished this Reversal Trading Strategy guide — I’m blown away. Insanely thorough. It answered questions I didn’t even know I had.
Order book explanations? Crystal clear.
The sections on strategy style (Bollinger Bands & RSI examples), outlier moves, 5 price action structures, and the 3 types of mean reversion brought clarity to what used to feel like chaos.
The practical examples are gold.
It doesn’t just explain concepts — it connects the dots.
This should be a paid product. Easy buy.
I wrote a 214 page guide on my Reversal Trading Strategy
Then I recorded a 10min video to explain it
02:45 - Good/Bad Conditions for Trading Reversals
04:34 - Entry/Stop/Target rules
05:36 - 25 Good/Bad Trade Examples
If you want it, click the link in my bio
(yes, it's free)
89
EVikkk retweeted
A lot of Traders won’t like to hear this
Low-R strategies actually have huge advantages over High-R strategies
Most people try to “improve” their strategy by forcing bigger targets. But before widening TP, the smarter move is to risk more on the best setups.
I'll explain this with an example below
Let's start by looking at two strategies:
• 1R target, 55% win rate → EV ≈ 0.1
• 2R target, 37% win rate → EV ≈ 0.11
On paper the 2R system looks better, it has a higher EV per trade.
... but in In reality, the 2R system has a lower winrate which results in having a higher variance, bigger losing streaks, bigger drawdowns, and you’re forced to risk LESS per trade.
Meanwhile the 1R strategy with 55% winrate has roughly half the maximum drawdown, meaning you can double the USD risk per trade to match the maximum drawdown of the 2R.
That means the EV in USD is far higher with the 1R strategy despite the EV in "units of R" being lower.
If both systems produce 0.1 EV per trade but one lets you risk 2x more, the second one will make more money over large sample sizes.
High-R strategies look cool online but in terms of risk-adjusted returns, Low-R systems usually crush them.
🌶️
EVikkk retweeted
Success in crypto belongs to one type of person:
People who realise that winning isn't fast, easy, or guaranteed.
Your best wins will come from patience, skill, and compounding good decisions.
Diamond-tier 💎 Some ideas just hit you right in the brain’s feels:
"When taking a trade or researching a setup, it’s useful to ask yourself: Why should I get paid for this, and what’s the risk?
To be clear: you’re getting paid because there is a risk.
If used incorrectly, relying on a confirmation-based framework leads to risk avoidance, analysis paralysis, and missing out on trades without justification.
The first question to ask yourself: Am I trying to manage risk or avoid it entirely?
The risk avoidance version of confirmation is when the confirmation only becomes actionable once a large portion of the trade has already played out and much of the risk (and by extension, the reason you would get paid) has dissipated.
Confirmation is a symptom of this risk-avoidant mindset." 👏👏
352
Placing a stop-loss doesn’t mean you’ve truly accepted the risk. Your SL should be your trader alter ego — not just something you place because a course told you to.
132
Nothing worse than the ‘I told you so’ energy in trading. It’s not helpful, just self-glorifying. People learn best by making their own calls — and sometimes their own mistakes.
216
Volatility exposes everything.
No room for ego, no space for fantasy. If you’re trading, your edge is in clarity—simple rules, clean risk, steady execution.
Confidence doesn’t matter when price proves you wrong. Admit it, adjust, move on. The market isn’t here to validate your opinion. Hope isn’t a plan. Forget predictions—use probabilities.
Work with what is, not what should be.
308
EVikkk retweeted
Debunking Hyperliquid FUD (Part 1: HLP, liquidations, and platform guarantees)
It's sad to see coordinated misinformation campaigns targeting Hyperliquid, which have led to widespread misunderstanding of what we are all working so hard to build.
In response, this series of posts provides detailed, factual explanations of how Hyperliquid works. As a community, we must actively fight FUD by spreading the truth. The tone with which we do this also matters: the best way to grow as a protocol and ultimately house all finance is to remain humble and welcome more users into the ecosystem.
--
The first post focuses on HLP and liquidations on Hyperliquid.
High level summary
The FUD is that the Hyperliquid protocol is subject to large losses stemming from manipulation. On the contrary, Hyperliquid's margining design mathematically guarantees platform solvency. Note that HLP’s losses are isolated to the vault itself, and Hyperliquid does not depend on HLP’s operation to exist. This was true even before the JELLY incident. After the JELLY incident, there is an additional change to protect HLP from losses during backstop liquidations. The fundamental changes are to HLP, not the platform itself.
HLP background
HLP is a permissionless protocol vault pioneered by Hyperliquid. HLP does not collect fees from depositors, and historically has returned 60M USDC in pnl to its depositors. On CEXs, this profit typically goes to the internal market making desks instead of users.
HLP plays two roles: market making and backstop liquidations. In terms of market making, HLP runs a passive strategy that accounts for less than 2% of Hyperliquid's total volume. The vast majority of volume on Hyperliquid is between two non-HLP users.
Liquidations
On Hyperliquid, liquidations are first sent to the book as a market order. This allows any user to participate in providing liquidity to liquidations, which is profitable flow on average. On other exchanges, this flow is internalized by the exchange as a revenue source.
HLP only performs backstop liquidations, which involves taking over positions that are unable to be market liquidated. When account values go negative, the last resort for platform solvency is auto-deleveraging (ADL). ADL closes underwater positions against the most profitable and highly leveraged positions on the other side, ensuring the protocol's solvency. ADL is extremely rare but importantly targets the attacker's position on both sides during manipulation attempts as described below.
JELLY incident
An attacker recently attempted to exploit HLP by opening a large long and short against themself. Open interest caps allowed a position worth 4M USDC at the time of trade, but the logical issue was that HLP collateralized the liquidation with its full balance. It is false that the platform itself had solvency risks, but HLP was indeed overexposed to the manipulation.
Changes made
Now the liquidator component vault of HLP has capped collateral, limiting its potential loss by backstop liquidations. A historical analysis was conducted based on this new system. Apart from the JELLY incident, this change would not have caused additional ADLs in the past, even during extreme volatility. However, it would have minimized HLP’s losses during the JELLY incident to low six figures, which is far less than the attacker spent on market manipulation. In particular, ADL would have closed the attacker’s momentarily profitable long position, leaving other JELLY positions untouched.
Validators now actively discuss delistings in an open governance forum on Discord. Several interesting dashboards have been created by users and validators: stalequant.github.io/hyperli…, data.asxn.xyz/dashboard/hl-r….
Market cap of the underlying spot assets will likely be an important input into delisting considerations. While delistings are important to ensure that users on the platform do not suffer from potential price manipulation, they are not required for platform solvency.
New state of margining system and HLP
Hyperliquid still functions as before, handling under-collateralized positions in the order of 1) market liquidations 2) backstop liquidations 3) ADL. Backstop liquidations on HLP now have additional protections to cap the total losses, making mark price manipulation attacks more expensive than the limited available gain from HLP. HLP's role continues to shrink as Hyperliquid grows, and at this point is nonessential to the protocol's operation. HLP still exists as a source of protocol yield through backstop liquidations and providing consistent background liquidity.
EVikkk retweeted
When North Korea hacks Bybit everyone is like “We can't let the bad actors win" and stands together as an industry.
When exchanges conspire and Jeff closes out malicious trading activity via ADL it’s “Hype is going to zero and we should let the bad actors win”.
Hyperliquid.
In the markets, MMs and institutional players have only two sources of making money: the FEAR and GREED of smaller participants.
On X, there are only two sources of drama: hopium and FUD.
If it’s not hopium or FUD, it’s boring. No emotions, no show. People either need hope for a 🚀 or panic over a crash. Everything else is just facts, and facts just don’t sell.
And these directly correlate with fear and greed—hopium fuels greed, FUD fuels fear.
Deal with it.
115
The only right decision @chameleon_jeff could make, he made today: over $200M of user funds were saved! Of course, now all the skeptics will start saying, ‘You’re not a DEX,’ but the community is grateful—reputation comes first.
Meanwhile, the guys at Binance and OKX have finally shown their true colors: their attempt to crush a competitor backfired on them, while interest in @HyperliquidX has only grown.
CEXs, with their endless greed, are not friends to traders or small investors—they’re just a part of the crypto infrastructure, ideally to be replaced by @HyperliquidX.
By the way, HLP is far from the main source of revenue for HyperliquidX .
After evidence of suspicious market activity, the validator set convened and voted to delist JELLY perps.
All users apart from flagged addresses will be made whole from the Hyper Foundation. This will be done automatically in the coming days based on onchain data. There is no need to open a ticket. Methodology will be shared in detail in a later announcement.
As with other chains, validators often need to convene to take decisive action as a group to ensure the integrity of the network. It is a priority to enhance robustness and transparency to the voting system.
Note that HLP’s 24 hour pnl as of writing is approximately 700k USDC. Technical improvements will be made, and the network will grow stronger as a result of lessons learned. More details will be shared shortly.
176
Hyperliquid = HyperCore + HyperEVM
Hyperliquid = HyperCore + HyperEVM.
One piece of user feedback since HyperEVM’s alpha launch was to more intuitively communicate how the HyperEVM fits into the larger context of Hyperliquid. To this effect, the native pieces of the Hyperliquid execution state have been organized under one umbrella term: HyperCore.
HyperCore consists of performant native components: order book perp and spot DEX, staking, oracles, multi-sig, etc. HyperEVM is a general purpose world-computer, allowing builders to deploy code that interacts with both HyperEVM and HyperCore. Together, they form one global, composable state on Hyperliquid, secured by the state-of-the-art HyperBFT consensus algorithm. Importantly, any interaction across the Core/EVM boundary is part of execution itself. There is one unified state, with no need for bridging, proofs, or trusted signers.
HyperEVM offers builders a familiar interface to plug into the most powerful permissionless financial system in crypto. Let's walk through some concrete examples.
A project XYZ deploys an ERC20 contract on the HyperEVM using standard EVM tooling. They deploy a corresponding spot asset XYZ permissionlessly in the HyperCore ticker auction. Once the XYZ HyperCore token and HyperEVM contract are linked, users can seamlessly transfer their XYZ balance to HyperCore for order book trading. Two key improvements compared to CEX listings:
1) The entire process is permissionless. No behind-the-scenes negotiations for preferential treatment. Hyperliquid is a neutral platform for finance.
2) There is no bridging risk between HyperCore and HyperEVM. On the other hand, CEXs need to manage deposits and withdrawals through wallets that could be hacked. HyperCore and HyperEVM are one unified state.
Trading and building on the same chain is a 10x product improvement over CEXs.
Let's go further. A lending protocol sets up a pool contract that accepts XYZ as collateral and lends out another token ABC to the borrower. To determine the liquidation threshold, the lending smart contract can read XYZ/ABC prices directly from the HyperCore order books using a "read precompile." For a Solidity developer, this is as simple as calling a built-in function.
Suppose the borrower's position requires liquidation. The lending smart contract can send orders directly swapping XYZ and ABC on the HyperCore order books using a "write precompile." Again, this is a simple built-in function in Solidity. In a few lines of code, the lending protocol has implemented protocolized liquidations similar to how perps function on HyperCore. A theme of the HyperEVM is to abstract away the deep liquidity on HyperCore as a building block for arbitrary user applications.
As these interactions become available on mainnet HyperEVM, I look forward to seeing the innovative ways that builders leverage these primitives to reinvent finance. These examples only scratch the surface of what is possible.
Hyperliquid.
262