Our previous mainstream strategy was essentially a long-term value logic of "holding steady."

In a unilateral upward cycle, this approach is indeed effective—less fuss, resistance to volatility, and over time, profits naturally amplify.

But this round, things are starting to change.

The core issue in the market now is no longer just "Is Bitcoin's 60k bottom?" but a more critical judgment: if the future enters a long-term oscillation and repeated tug-of-war structure, does the logic of "time for space" still hold?

With the same holding period, different entry points can ultimately lead to vastly different returns, or even just be consumed back and forth by the market.

Ethereum is the same. The key isn't whether "should I add heavily when it drops to 1,000," but whether, once it truly falls below 1,000, it still has the ability to bounce back in the next cycle.

If this question itself is uncertain, then the strategy of "buy more as it falls" is no longer a given, but a hypothesis that needs to be re-evaluated.

Therefore, the upcoming trading approach may need to be adjusted:

No longer simply rely on "long-term holding," but pay more attention to rhythm and judgment—
When to buy, when to wait, when to doubt, doubt first.

It's not about abandoning long-term, but about no longer defaulting to "long-term is always correct."

Just like real estate, liquor, or even gold assets: making long-term allocations at the wrong time essentially means passively enduring a long and inefficient cycle.

Good assets may eventually hit new highs, but during this process—
Are you accumulating profits, or being consumed by time? These are two completely different things.

A more realistic point is: when funds are occupied long-term, you may also miss out on other stage-specific, more efficient opportunities.