[Reviewing the scenes you didn’t enter] How to compare the precision of postponement

Only the agreed chart is saved, leaving behind the decision that was passed over. Aren't there days like that?

This time, I will整理 the 【Review of Unadopted Candidates】.

Good evening!

This is Masashi^^

What I want to avoid is reviewing only when there is a profit/loss, and not distinguishing between a good pass and an early pass.

So, the first thing I look at is only the facts at the time of the pass.

Please read this as a discussion to stop at the point of reviewing not by increasing data.

The week's standard is not to regard the pass as a failure just because the result extended.

? Before placing an order, decide one place to return

If you decide in advance to review only three passes over the weekend with the results hidden, the time to decide will be shorter.

If you have not decided 【the facts when you passed】, you will make the standard after looking at the movement.

With a standard made after the movement, it becomes difficult to keep the line of 【not treating pass as failure just because the result extended】.

Records are kept in the form of【recording legitimate pass, early pass, and undetermined】.

Having this one line allows you to review the missing conditions the next day.

When in doubt, return to the【facts at the time of the pass】you decided before placing the order.

Example of execution:【recording legitimate pass, early pass, and undetermined】

? Do not reflect losses on one chart

When you look at a completed chart, the correct entry and exit become obvious easily.

Hide the results and only confirm whether at that time you could say you were at the wall just before this place.

But in practice, there is information visible before entry, information increased during holding, and hesitation before stop-loss as separate items.

Therefore reflections begin with【what facts were visible before entry】.

Mixing these three leads to too many causes to decide what to fix next.

First, along the timeline, divide the judgments into three.

Divide the loss not into one result, but into three decision moments.

To narrow down what to fix, review in chronological order.

? Retrieve the facts that were confirmed before entering

First, write only the facts you actually saw before placing the order.

Check whether the location, the flow just before, and the stop-loss position were recorded in the words of that time.

Reasons added after looking at the result are removed at this stage.

If the explanation before entering was short, the next place to fix is not the method but the pre-confirmation.

Only keep facts that can be explained without showing the results.

Removing post hoc analysis reveals the confirmations that were missing at that time.

? Look for only things you changed while holding

Next, review the moments when you changed the initial plan during holding.

You extended it, widened the stop-loss, added a different basis.

Even if the decision before entry was not bad, changing the plan during holding will make the results different.

Return to the concept of GOLD’s antidote and record the initial assumption and mid-course changes separately.

Even if the entry is the same, changing the plan during holding makes it a different trade.

The points to look at are whether the market changed, or whether you changed the plan for your convenience.

✅ How to put into words the one minute before stop-loss

Finally, write down what you were thinking just before the stop-loss.

You might return, you might want to wait a little longer, you cannot cut it here.

Compare these words to the stop-loss position you decided at the start.

In the next attempt, if the same words appear, return to the plan. This is how to use the review.

The hesitation before stop-loss becomes a warning you can use next time.

Do not blame your emotions; identify which words signaled a change in the plan.

? For those who revert to the same loss even after reflection

People who write long reflections every time but still collapse at the same place next time.

People who change their method every time they lose and have no records to compare.

People who only review the entry and not the holding or the stop-loss before.

Such people need coursework that divides judgments in time sequence before increasing knowledge.

Instead of increasing the amount of reflection, narrow down the next place to fix to one.

GOLD antidote should be used to separate losses into units that you can fix yourself. This week, we will group together the parts to leave: legitimate pass, early pass, and undetermined.

Reviewing scenes where you did not enter, while hiding the results

At the weekend, select about three passes to review, and reread the places, reactions, and cancellation conditions from back then without looking at subsequent price moves. The number is a practice guide and not evidence of performance.

If the conditions were missing, a later rise might have still made the pass legitimate; conversely, if the conditions were met and you still exited due to fear, record where that fear appeared.

If you rewrite after looking at the results with “I should have entered,” you cannot compare next time. Keep the original record and add weekend insights in a separate column.

Review column: facts at the time / reasons for pass / what was learned later / one item to change next time

If the price moved significantly after the pass, was that pass a failure?

The answer cannot be decided without looking at the conditions at the time.

If the reaction at the time was insufficient, it isn’t a failure just by the result. By separating two times, “when passing = reaction not confirmed / later extended,” you can consider whether to change the next conditions.

Materials to leave before opening the教材

If you use GOLD antidote for review of passes, you first need your screen and notes at the decision point. Merely gathering situations to fit the教材 explanations later won’t reveal your pass-habit.

For those with no records at all, start by saving a week before purchasing. Even if you have saved scenes, if you lack consistent evaluative words, you can still compare the教材 framework.

The precision of passes is checked not by the result but by the conditions at the time.

In the next pass

If you do not place an order, write the reason for that moment in one line.【Pass = reacti on not yet confirmed】, and describe the facts at that time. Do not rewrite the evaluation by weekend. That one pass becomes material for review^^

?View details of the GOLD antidote

Thank you always for reading ^^