The dilemma of the bag-holder, frankly, reflects a widely accepted but flawed logic. Many people would say this is just a game; if you lack the skills, you have to accept market lessons. But if you apply this theory to life, the result becomes absurd—should you silently endure if you're unhappy because others are more capable? Obviously not. The difference between trading markets and real life is that a person's fate is never determined by a single factor. Timing, information asymmetry, luck, systemic risks... these variables intertwine, and no one can simply attribute outcomes to an individual's ability or inability. True clarity lies in acknowledging the complexity of the market, rather than explaining everything with a simplistic win-lose dichotomy.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
19 Likes
Reward
19
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
DefiSecurityGuard
· 10h ago
ngl, this "just git gud" mentality is literally a honeypot for normie thinking. everyone wants to blame the bagholders for lacking skills but they never mention the information asymmetries, timing exploits, and systemic risks... classic rugpull narrative tbh. DYOR always, but pretending markets are purely meritocratic? that's the real vulnerability here.
Reply0
GasOptimizer
· 01-11 13:00
That's true, but the reality is so cruel... Winners make history, losers find excuses.
View OriginalReply0
MEVvictim
· 01-11 12:56
Really, every time I see the excuse "Poor technology, serves you right for losing," I want to vomit. It’s as if we’re all playing the same game.
The information gap alone is enough to crush everything, not to mention the systemic risks.
View OriginalReply0
BrokenRugs
· 01-11 12:54
Exactly, that's why the arguments like "lack of technical skill, deserved to lose" sound satisfying but are actually unfounded. The market has always been a multi-variable game, not just a simple ability test.
View OriginalReply0
SurvivorshipBias
· 01-11 12:50
Another story of being cut, but why do some people still keep talking about the "lack of technology and deserved loss" routine... It's really easy to criticize when you're not the one in the game.
View OriginalReply0
FunGibleTom
· 01-11 12:40
That's right, this "survival of the fittest" logic is really annoying. Luck and information gaps are right there; not everyone can have the full picture.
View OriginalReply0
GweiWatcher
· 01-11 12:37
Well said. It's truly absurd to always shift the blame to those with "insufficient technology." Luck and information gaps are completely overlooked.
The dilemma of the bag-holder, frankly, reflects a widely accepted but flawed logic. Many people would say this is just a game; if you lack the skills, you have to accept market lessons. But if you apply this theory to life, the result becomes absurd—should you silently endure if you're unhappy because others are more capable? Obviously not. The difference between trading markets and real life is that a person's fate is never determined by a single factor. Timing, information asymmetry, luck, systemic risks... these variables intertwine, and no one can simply attribute outcomes to an individual's ability or inability. True clarity lies in acknowledging the complexity of the market, rather than explaining everything with a simplistic win-lose dichotomy.