Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Launchpad
Be early to the next big token project
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
More
Recently, many people have been paying attention to the development history of a certain industry leader, which coincidentally confirms one of my previous ideas: if you truly want to go further in a certain industry, spending time studying how the most successful people in that field got started, how they make decisions, and how they respond to cycles is already the most efficient learning path.
Instead of blindly exploring, it's better to trace every move of those who have lived the longest and earned the most. The pitfalls they have stepped into and the points they got right are often more valuable than any textbook.
Experience from pitfalls, to put it simply, is a matter of time cost. Those who can't afford that price still have to go through it themselves.
Learning the right path can save ten years of detours, but the prerequisite is to have insight. Without it, it's all in vain.
---
Really, understanding how a person survives a bear market is more useful than reading ten books.
---
I'm just worried that what they learn is their luck, not logic. This is very key.
---
Tracking the decision-making process of successful people? Sure, but don’t forget the background of the times; strategies change across different cycles.
---
What you said is correct, but the problem is most people still learn the superficial set...
---
The phrase "stepping on more pits is more valuable" is spot on, saving so much trial-and-error cost.
---
How much luck do the longest-standing people in the industry have? That’s a question.
---
Really? But I see most people still follow the trend of buying coins; they can't really learn others' logic.
---
To the point where even success stories have to be packaged as "researching industry leaders."
---
Easy to say. Which beginner has the patience to review others' five or ten-year decisions? They've long been educated by the market.
---
This theory is most useful in a bear market, when you can truly see who is still alive.
---
The industry ceiling is different. Can you compare the era when they started to now?
---
I just want to know how to identify those who seem successful but are actually just lucky.
---
It sounds like just finding an idol and going all-in, right? That's the most dangerous when you're impulsive.
---
Instead of studying how they got started, it's better to see how they are now cutting leeks—that's the real lesson.
---
The problem is, most "leaders'" success stories are just post-hoc rationalizations.
Following successful people is not as good as asking yourself: Do you have their courage and timing? I think luck is seriously underestimated.
Indeed, knowing how they avoid pitfalls doesn't mean you can dodge them when you encounter them... the environment is completely different.
This sounds nice, but in the fast-paced Web3 space, yesterday's experience often becomes outdated today... Do you agree?
Actually, the most important thing is to have your own judgment. Copying others' methods will likely lead to failure nine times out of ten.
It's easy to say, but few can really review and identify patterns.
Looking at this cycle, those who have lasted the longest are actually the ones who know when to keep quiet.
Many people copy others, but only a few truly understand.
History will repeat itself, but the parameters are different each time, which is the most tricky part.
However, finding the right people can definitely save you a lot of tuition fees, provided you can recognize who has really made money.
Instead of following a certain person blindly, it's better to understand why their decisions worked in that particular environment.
There's nothing wrong with this approach, but the only concern is that you might learn only survivor bias.
There's no denying that those who have lived longer have their experience points maxed out.
Studying successful people is fine, but the key is to know which parts can be copied and which are due to luck.
Here's a question: their decisions were valid in that era, but do they still work today?
Blindly following trends is the most dangerous; copying them outright can easily lead to failure.
However, being able to see how top players survive is still a valid approach.
Textbooks can't match practical experience, I agree with that, but you also need to learn to think beyond the obvious.
Pitfalls I’ve stepped into? Bro, I’m a pit-type researcher who accumulates capital, and now I’m a living reverse indicator.
There’s no blind exploration, but I explore too clearly—every time I perfectly踩中清算价.
To live longer and earn more, my secret is stable losses, at least staying stable.
The good way to put it is tracing the big shots’ chess paths; the less flattering way is automatically cutting positions based on replay videos, which actually has a certain ritualistic feel.
The contract side has already arranged an automatic learning plan for me, with precise liquidation once a month, more disciplined than any course.
---
In other words, it's about saving time by standing on the shoulders of giants, but you need to understand the background of their pitfalls first.
---
Oh my, isn't this what I've been wanting to say... Exploring on your own is a huge waste of life; just watch how the most profitable people play it safe.
---
It sounds reasonable, but you need to distinguish whether you're learning their decision-making logic or just trying to copy quickly... the results are often very different.
---
Really? Why do I feel most people just say "Oh, I see" after watching, then still end up crashing when the time comes.
---
This set of theories is only useful for those with deep industry understanding; beginners just watch for fun.
---
Reliability is reliable, but I'm worried that learning only superficial stuff might make you overconfident and actually more dangerous.