Recently, it has been observed that the trading style of Bitcoin and mainstream coins seems to have changed.

The obvious change is that before the market approaches a key high or low point for a reversal, there are often small fluctuations with repeated bottoming or topping—three tests, four tests, or even more—constantly approaching the critical levels before the reversal. This gives traders the intuitive feeling that the trend will continue to extend, making it easy to fall into the dilemma of not daring to go against the trend.

Looking at historical trends, previous reversal patterns were much more straightforward: it might be just one spike or at most two tests of the bottom or top, then a slow reversal and clearing of positions, rarely seeing so many fake moves piled up.

Why does this resonate so much? In recent real trading operations, multiple carefully set target levels have generally been reached, but in the end, they often get stopped out during the repeated three and four tests—frequently hitting the break-even point and being forced to exit. Although technically no loss is incurred, this experience indeed prompts reflection.

The question is: should we make a slight adjustment to the trading system? For example, in the strategy of reducing positions after reaching targets, should we consider a more flexible break-even exit mechanism instead of stubbornly holding onto the target to chase further gains? Or are these just personal luck fluctuations and psychological effects?