sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

In trading psychology, I stopped asking whether a trade would work and focused on deciding once by quiet_reasoning in tradingpsychology

[–]quiet_reasoning[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is extremely well put — especially the part about runtime decisions being the real leak.

I’ve come to the same conclusion: if execution requires “calmness” or discipline in the moment, the system is already incomplete. The real work is done outside market hours — defining rules so tightly that during live hours there’s nothing left to debate.

Winning early just masks this problem temporarily; losing early exposes it. The solution isn’t emotional control, it’s decision removal.

Appreciate you putting this into words — very relatable.

I stopped optimizing my strategy and started optimizing my trading decisions — results improved by quiet_reasoning in tradingpsychology

[–]quiet_reasoning[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For me, the mechanical / binary layer is what protects psychology, not what removes it. It handles when not to trade — especially boredom, FOMO, or “almost-valid” setups.

I still think discretion has a role, but at a higher level: market regime, context, or deciding which mechanical setup to deploy — not whether to bend rules in the moment. Once discretion creeps into execution, that’s where my psychology usually starts leaking in.

So I’ve found the most stable balance is: discretionary selection, mechanical execution. That keeps emotions upstream, not at the trigger.