2026-01-08 07:30:31

The same "boldness" cannot be generalized. Sometimes, daring to increase position size and leverage can indeed capture market dividends — but only if there is a complete risk control system in place, with proper position planning and stop-loss settings. This kind of operation is called boundary-based aggression.

But some people ignore risk control, chasing gains and selling losses, following hot trends, or blindly following online influencers — turning strategy into gambling. The result is often losing principal, going into debt, or even getting liquidated.

To put it simply, for the same profit target, one approach is a probability game, and the other is about giving away money. Market risk always objectively exists, but how to respond and whether to operate within a framework is up to the investor. Many people end up losing because they confuse these two concepts.

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.

19 Likes

Reward
19
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

StableGenius

· 01-11 07:30

yeah, empirically speaking... watched this exact pattern play out like a thousand times. the difference between "calculated risk" and "financial suicide" is literally just... having a stop loss lmao. but nah, people see 3x leverage on some shitcoin and suddenly think they're traders. spoiler alert: you're not.

Reply0

All-InQueen

· 01-10 19:48

The comments from the queen of all-in: Risk control may sound simple, but very few actually implement it... The old brothers around me who suffered huge losses, aren't they all thinking they can dodge that one shot? Listening to influencers' calls and going all-in is indeed gambling, but I've also seen strict stop-losses still get blown out... No matter how complete the framework is, it can't withstand black swan events. This article is saying: Even when losing money, some lose due to luck, while others lose due to their own brains. Wait, was my previous operation a boundary-pushing aggressive move or pure gambling... Reflecting on it.

View OriginalReply0

OnchainDetective

· 01-08 07:55

Listening to influencers go all-in is basically actively giving away money, not at all unfair.

View OriginalReply0

CompoundPersonality

· 01-08 07:51

That's so true, I'm just worried that some people might not understand this difference. Proper risk control is what makes it an investment; without risk control, it's pure gambling, and getting liquidated is well-deserved. How are the group of people who follow internet celebrities' all-in strategies doing now? Do they have any sense of what they're doing? There's a huge difference between having a framework and not having one—this is really the dividing line between experts and rookies. Being aggressive within a framework and blindly gambling are on the same line; most people want to cross it but end up losing their footing. Essentially, it's a mindset issue—greed makes people forget all risk controls, and then they get liquidated and have to host a feast. It's really about execution; knowing what to do is one thing, actually doing it is the true mark of a winner. Risk control is really difficult—easy to understand but hard to implement. So many people talk about it nicely but ultimately can't shake the habit of chasing gains and selling at a loss.

View OriginalReply0

RunWithRugs

· 01-08 07:50

Listening to the group of people who follow internet celebrities and go all-in, it's definitely time for them to wake up. No risk control is just a gambler's mentality; sooner or later, they'll get wiped out. Risk management is truly a watershed; the difference between those who understand and those who don't is huge. Adding positions should be based on sound reasoning, not blind all-in. That's the way professional players operate. To be blunt, most people lose because they don't take risk control seriously, thinking luck will save them. The difference between a probability game and money-giving is obvious; you can tell at a glance who is a novice and who is a seasoned player. Those who chase the rise with all-in will all have to pay tuition fees in the end; the market won't care about your principal.

View OriginalReply0

PrivateKeyParanoia

· 01-08 07:50

Listening to internet celebrities call for all-in bets and reflexively following them should be a moment of reflection; that is gambling, not investing. --- Risk control is easy to say but hard to do. Most people still cannot control their own hands. --- Aggressive behavior with boundaries and mindless all-ins are separated only by a single thought, but the results are worlds apart. --- That's correct, the problem is that most people simply cannot distinguish whether they are playing a game or gambling. --- People who get liquidated are often not due to leverage itself, but because they lack risk control awareness. --- Chasing gains and cutting losses based on calls, in simple terms, is throwing money as if it were bets, and they deserve to lose. --- Frameworks are important, but even more important is having the discipline to actually follow through. Most people lack this last step.

View OriginalReply0

DEXRobinHood

· 01-08 07:46

Relying on influencers to call trades and going all-in is truly asking for humiliation. I've seen too many such retail investors. Aggressiveness with boundaries is what makes you professional; reckless aggression without risk control is just giving money to the market makers. Risk control cannot be overlooked. One margin call and you're back to square one. Well said. Many people can't distinguish between strategy and gambling, and in the end, they blame the market for losing everything. Setting stop-loss orders is really a basic skill. Skip this step and just wait to be trapped.

View OriginalReply0

HodlVeteran

· 01-08 07:37

I have to say, this is so true. Back then, I was among those who followed internet influencers to go all-in, and I lost my principal and ended up in debt. I'm still paying it off. The only difference is one word—framework. Having a framework is investing; no framework is just gambling in a casino. Honestly, now I see people chasing gains and selling off in panic, and it makes me nervous. Risk control really needs to be done thoroughly, or you'll crash sooner or later. Trust me, leverage is okay, but you must have a complete stop-loss plan; otherwise, you're just giving money to the market. The easiest way to lose in a bear market is those who think they’re brave but are actually just gambling. These past two years have been a painful lesson for me. This article hits home; it feels like it's talking about me. Confusing probability with gambling—I've fallen into this trap for a long time.

View OriginalReply0