2025-12-25 06:25:55

Three consecutive stop-losses, this wave is considered a failure. The performance during backtesting was disastrous, and even leveraging up to three times couldn't save it. The current state of this AI strategy is: a total defeat. The drawdown was too severe.

I originally wanted to turn things around with it, but it seems I need to readjust my approach. From 856U down to 308U, this tuition fee has been paid. I need to revisit the strategy logic, identify the issues, and start over.

However, recently I’ve come across some new methods that sound a bit mysterious. I plan to set aside this previous AI strategy and try out this new approach. Honestly, this is a completely unfamiliar territory for me, and the risk level doesn’t seem low.

So I decided to allocate 30U for a small trial. Just to verify whether this method is really as magical as rumored. Anyway, if I lose, it’s only this much—consider it as tuition.

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.

6 Likes

Reward
6
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GasFeeVictim

· 2h ago

Haha, it's another story of dropping from over 800 to just over 300. AI strategies really can't be relied upon. If leverage can't save it, it indicates a bigger problem. Trying out new methods with 30U is a smart choice. Anyway, I've already paid the tuition fees, and small-scale validation of the idea is indeed a rational approach. I'm just worried that this "mysterious method" might be the same old trick, leading to another big drawdown, and then I'll have to write another similar reflection. In cases of severe drawdowns, the root cause often isn't the strategy itself but the parameters and market fit. When re-evaluating the logic, it's recommended to extend the historical data and not just look at the recent market conditions. 30U can actually be tried, but don't use leverage. Just treat it as an extension of paying tuition fees.

View OriginalReply0

CounterIndicator

· 2h ago

Another AI strategy dream shattered, dropping directly from 856 to 308. This time, the tuition fee paid was really hefty.

View OriginalReply0

SwapWhisperer

· 2h ago

856 drops to 308, this AI is really outrageous... Even triple leverage can't save it, it's definitely time to reflect. The new approach sounds really strange, but trying 30U is also okay, at worst just pay some tuition again. The strategic logic needs to be completely overturned and restarted, don't stubbornly insist anymore, brother. This round's tuition was a bit expensive, but at least I know where I'm weak. A small test of 30U is actually quite rational, to avoid another crash. AI doesn't seem to be万能, you need to find a method that suits you. From 856 to 308, this ride was intense... new ideas must be approached cautiously. Three consecutive stop-losses, this deal is really a loss, but adjusting the mindset is better than stubbornly resisting. Using 30U to verify a new approach, I give full marks for this attitude, don't gamble big anymore. This crash at least serves as a sober lesson, more valuable than anything else.

View OriginalReply0

RugResistant

· 2h ago

Oops, another "tuition fee" again, dropping from 856 to 308... This AI strategy really tanked, leverage can't save it. But I have to say, trying a new approach with 30U is okay, at least recognizing the risk and not throwing more into the bad pit. What is this strange new idea? Can you share the thought process?

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityLarry

· 2h ago

Bro, you're directly losing money this time, from 856 to 308, that must hurt a lot. The AI strategy failed and you still dare to try new tricks, a small test with 30U? I think you're really hooked, haha. Triple leverage can't save you, indicating that the logic itself is flawed. Don't rush to change your approach; you need to reflect first. The "mysterious" new gameplay doesn't sound very good. Brothers who follow the trend are easily wiped out. This tuition fee wasn't cheap. Hopefully next time you can learn your lesson and avoid the same mistake.

View OriginalReply0

ChainMemeDealer

· 2h ago

856 dropped to 308, paying tuition really hurts haha 30U trial? It's recommended to practice with pen and paper for a week before jumping in New strategies are always like this, it sounds strange but only after implementing do you realize how risky it is The main issue this time was poor risk control; using triple leverage is basically suicide Trying new ideas is fine, but don't go all in again

View OriginalReply0

NoStopLossNut

· 3h ago

Whoa, isn't this just teaching the leeks a lesson? Dropping from 850 to 308 directly in half, still daring to play with 30U, brother, your courage is commendable. --- As for AI strategy failures, we're all tired of hearing about it. Every time they say they've found the problem, next time it'll be fine, but what about now... --- Is the new approach sinister? Then you better be more careful. Trying 30U with trial and error isn't a small matter. How many such validations can you withstand? --- Falling from 856 to 308 and still having the energy to try new ideas—that mindset is indeed commendable, but I'm just worried you'll keep losing more as you try. --- Three times leverage can't save you—what does that say? The strategy itself has issues, so don't pin hopes on the next one. --- I just want to know what exactly this "sinister new approach" is, but judging by your attitude, it's probably just the same old trick. --- I've heard too many times that using 30U as tuition fees. Sooner or later, once you've paid enough tuition, it's time to stop. --- AI strategy's major failure is normal; I'm just worried you'll keep messing around like this, and your principal will eventually be gone.

View OriginalReply0