I do have a working hypothesis that's worth sharing, especially in situations like this.
My current thinking is that the AI is actually detecting larger market processes.
That would explain why it keeps identifying important price levels so accurately, even though it's never explicitly asked to find support or resistance levels.
If that's true, then many of the "mistakes" we see may not really be mistakes at all.
They may simply reflect situations where large market participants are temporarily under pressure.
I'm not talking about manipulation or conspiracy.
I mean the natural behavior of large investors managing large positions.
When they're pushed away from their intended direction, they usually have every incentive to recover those positions.
Again, not because they're acting together, but because similar situations often produce similar behavior.
That's why I no longer rush to close these trades.
I used to.
Now I keep seeing the same story play out over and over, and that's exactly what I'm trying to test.
Right now, I expect stabilization first.
Then some probing around the range.
And after that, a recovery move higher.
So far, that's how these situations have consistently developed.
In fact, stabilization already seems to be taking shape, and maybe the bulls are getting ready for a counterattack.
We'll know soon π
P.S. The modes (f170) that use full risk control are doing just fine as wellβthey've already taken their stop-losses and moved on.
But I'll stress this again: we're not trying to make the equity curve look pretty.
We're trying to understand what's really happening.
That means the system has to be tested through the difficult scenarios too.
