2025-12-25 00:21:23

Regarding Bitcoin's recent weekly trend, there have been many points of debate in the market. Some analysts directly apply the 2024 trend logic—rallying from 80,000 to 110,000 in weekly patterns—to current market conditions, claiming that Bitcoin is completing a weekly bottoming process and is about to initiate a rebound. This mechanical technical analysis approach indeed has its issues.

In the current bear market environment, simply copying historical K-line patterns to predict future movements is essentially like "carving a boat to seek a sword." Market environment, capital flow, policy factors, and other dimensions are all changing, and similar patterns across different cycles often lead to completely different outcomes. If such analysis is used to "promise" retail investors a chance to recover, it is even more irresponsible.

Investors need to be cautious of analysis that over-relies on a single technical pattern while ignoring macro changes. Truly valuable market judgment should be based on multi-dimensional comprehensive analysis, rather than simple pattern replication.

BTC0.72%

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.

15 Likes

Reward
15
3
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AirdropHunter9000

· 8h ago

Bro, you're right. Copying historical candlestick patterns can make money, but why do we need brains then? The tricks are too deep. Every time, big V influencers say "just follow last year's pattern" and you can double your investment. That metaphor of "carving a boat to seek a sword" is perfect—markets change, but people still use old maps. Retail investors are often坑ed by these promises. They should have learned their lesson long ago. Multi-dimensional analysis sounds good, but very few can actually do it. The market is so magical—similar patterns often lead to completely opposite results. When macro conditions change, policies can flip overnight. Relying solely on charts is indeed too naive. Bitcoin's recent movements are quite strange. I don't really trust simple analogies for predictions. Pattern replication is the most deceptive. The ones who keep踩坑 are always the newbies following the herd. That's why most retail investors are still just韭菜—believing in charts but not using their brains.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeBeggar

· 8h ago

History may repeat itself but never the same; those who rely on formulas should reflect and reconsider. --- Is it that old, tired theory of pattern recognition again? Retail investors have heard enough of that. --- The "marking the boat to seek the sword" analogy is spot on; it's a common flaw among these so-called "technical masters." --- When macro changes but people stubbornly cling to charts, isn't that just a gambler's mentality? --- I've blocked all analyses promising to unlock losses; it's too disgusting. --- That pattern replication approach should have been phased out long ago; the market isn't that simple. --- Multi-dimensional analysis sounds reasonable, but who is actually doing it? --- Bitcoin is once again being used as an ATM; it's pitiful. --- Using the 8 to 11 pattern now? Are you out of your mind? --- If there are so many smart people, why are they all losing money? --- Irresponsible predictions are everywhere; that's just how this market is.

View OriginalReply0

PhantomMiner

· 8h ago

Is it the same old tune again? Will history repeat itself? I don't think so. 80,000 to 110,000 compared to now? Wake up, everyone. If it were really that simple this time, that would be great, but unfortunately the funding situation is completely different. Be cautious of those who confidently say "a rebound is imminent," as they are likely just trying to scam you. Similar patterns ≠ the same outcome. Why do some people never understand this principle? Copying and pasting last year's routines—who still believes in that now is just being naive. The macro environment has changed; can technical patterns alter the outcome? Clearly, they cannot.

View OriginalReply0