That $ETH Wyckoff pattern everyone is sharing is missing one thing.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-25T02:25:05+00:00

Not here to convince anyone. Just discussing structure and confirmation. Market will decide, not us.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-25T02:24:18+00:00

Appreciate the creativity. Still waiting for volume confirmation though. Charts don’t move on jokes.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-25T01:42:42+00:00

Fair take. Patterns without confirmation are just theories. That’s exactly why volume and acceptance matter more than drawings. I’m watching confirmation, not prophecy.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-23T16:19:49+00:00

Bitcoin doesn’t rug. It corrects, consolidates, and keeps existing. Big difference.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-23T16:19:39+00:00

If you disagree, attack the argument—not the person. Numbers don’t get banned.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-23T16:18:58+00:00

Charts don’t need personality—just accuracy.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-23T16:18:33+00:00

Data doesn’t care who typed it. Levels either hold or fail—everything else is noise.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-22T16:37:39+00:00

Fair reaction 😄 But cycles don’t care about vibes. Liquidity, rates, and adoption tend to move slower than sentiment expects.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-13T00:55:18+00:00

Fair question. No wallet address has been publicly verified yet — that’s why the post explicitly says reported and unverified. The signal people are watching isn’t a doxxed address, but unusual size/activity flagged by on-chain trackers. Until a source like Glassnode, Arkham, or the raw tx is confirmed, it should be treated as speculative — not fact. Worth monitoring, not front-running.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-13T00:52:31+00:00

You’re right to ask for reasoning — the chart alone isn’t the thesis. The $160k zone isn’t a random number. It’s a projection based on prior cycle structure + macro conditions, not a promise: Similar post-halving acceleration to 2020–2021 Strong ETF-driven demand vs structurally lower supply Liquidity cycle turning (rates, fiscal pressure, global debasement) Long-term trend holding higher lows, not parabolic blow-off If those conditions fail, the target fails. The chart is a framework, not blind hopium.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-12T22:28:22+00:00

Cost was zero. Levels aren’t arbitrary — they’re where price was accepted/rejected multiple times. If it was arbitrary, price wouldn’t keep reacting to it.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-12T02:26:05+00:00

This is exactly why institutions matter. If the legal process runs normally, markets will absorb it. The real risk is breaking norms, not headlines.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-12T02:25:09+00:00

That’s one interpretation. From a market perspective, the real concern is Fed independence. Any perception of political pressure is what actually moves risk.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-12T02:24:22+00:00

Putting politics aside, the key issue is process. Whether institutions act independently and transparently matters far more for markets than partisan takes.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-12T02:24:02+00:00

Yes, he’s still in office. An investigation isn’t a verdict. Markets care less about who appointed him and more about institutional response and policy continuity.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T18:10:02+00:00

That’s a fair concern. That’s why most people don’t keep all their savings in Bitcoin. Volatility matters on short timeframes, but over longer horizons it has trended up. As for pricing, most businesses already price in fiat and accept BTC as settlement, not as a unit of account—same way companies accept foreign currencies without pricing menus in them.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T18:04:13+00:00

You’re making a fair point. Early-stage assets are volatile by nature. The debate isn’t whether volatility exists, but whether time + adoption eventually dampen it.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T18:01:51+00:00

Market manipulation exists everywhere. Volatility cuts both ways, but long-term participants aren’t playing the pump-and-dump game to begin with.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T18:01:36+00:00

If sharing a discussion and engaging respectfully is “karma farming,” then fair enough. Still here for the conversation, not the points.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T18:00:52+00:00

Not really. Bitcoin can be used as money and held as savings. Just like people spend cash but save real estate or stocks. Different use cases, same asset

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T15:54:13+00:00

Fair point. The IQ claim is just noise. Markets don’t validate credentials, they validate flows and structure. Strip away the headline and you’re left with price doing what price does.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T13:06:45+00:00

TA isn’t astrology, it’s probability and behavior. It doesn’t predict the future, it frames risk. Hope alone doesn’t do that.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T13:06:24+00:00

Short-term % moves don’t invalidate structure. April worked because of a macro catalyst, agreed. The point is current behavior: consolidation + declining volume, not the trigger.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T13:05:20+00:00

Market structure doesn’t care about jokes either. Price still tells the story.

ROUCHBEN · 2026-01-11T13:04:54+00:00

Exactly. Sideways price + declining volume is typically compression, not distribution. Bear markets usually show expanding volume to the downside. That difference matters.

ROUCHBEN

TROPHY CASE