Recently, there has been a lot of discussion about whether there is arbitrage in certain DEX competitions. I want to clarify a few overlooked premises.
First point: The 70 traders participating are all by invitation only.
Why are they invited? The logic is straightforward—each person's influence is above a million. The project team isn't naive, and the participants are all industry insiders with reputation, recognition, and credibility. No one would risk their reputation for a few days of competition gains.
Second point: The competition mechanism itself is designed to amplify extreme results.
Throughout history, competitions are remembered for the winners (Li Zongwei is a special case haha). When you see your ranking fluctuate in real-time leaderboards, anxiety turns into instinct, and impulsiveness becomes natural. To achieve higher multiples, some choose to "go all-in"—this becomes the most direct choice psychologically. You'll see many talented traders end up with zero. This is not coincidence; it's an inevitable result of the mechanism design.
Third point: Objectively speaking, those who make the leaderboard are all excellent traders.
As someone who has long discussed futures trading, I can responsibly say: making the leaderboard does not rely on luck. Being on the list is itself a form of skill filtering. But the problem is, each trader has their own trading cycle and comfort zone. Some thrive on trends, others on oscillations; some only trade mainstream coins, others seek opportunities in new tokens. In a short cycle, high contrast, high-pressure competition, it's impossible to identify who is truly a long-term expert.
Therefore, for me, I didn't see this as a "performance showcase," but rather as a process to train mentality and optimize trading logic. Using low leverage and short cycles throughout, I am currently ranked 13th, still outside the top 10.
Finally, I want to say to all participating traders: don't trade just to criticize, and don't criticize just to criticize. Those brave enough to personally participate in such public competitions have already outperformed 99% of people who only criticize from the sidelines.
Win or lose is just a phase; whether you can survive long-term in the market is the real ranking.
Let's all keep pushing forward.
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.
Recently, there has been a lot of discussion about whether there is arbitrage in certain DEX competitions. I want to clarify a few overlooked premises.
First point: The 70 traders participating are all by invitation only.
Why are they invited? The logic is straightforward—each person's influence is above a million. The project team isn't naive, and the participants are all industry insiders with reputation, recognition, and credibility. No one would risk their reputation for a few days of competition gains.
Second point: The competition mechanism itself is designed to amplify extreme results.
Throughout history, competitions are remembered for the winners (Li Zongwei is a special case haha). When you see your ranking fluctuate in real-time leaderboards, anxiety turns into instinct, and impulsiveness becomes natural. To achieve higher multiples, some choose to "go all-in"—this becomes the most direct choice psychologically. You'll see many talented traders end up with zero. This is not coincidence; it's an inevitable result of the mechanism design.
Third point: Objectively speaking, those who make the leaderboard are all excellent traders.
As someone who has long discussed futures trading, I can responsibly say: making the leaderboard does not rely on luck. Being on the list is itself a form of skill filtering. But the problem is, each trader has their own trading cycle and comfort zone. Some thrive on trends, others on oscillations; some only trade mainstream coins, others seek opportunities in new tokens. In a short cycle, high contrast, high-pressure competition, it's impossible to identify who is truly a long-term expert.
Therefore, for me, I didn't see this as a "performance showcase," but rather as a process to train mentality and optimize trading logic. Using low leverage and short cycles throughout, I am currently ranked 13th, still outside the top 10.
Finally, I want to say to all participating traders: don't trade just to criticize, and don't criticize just to criticize. Those brave enough to personally participate in such public competitions have already outperformed 99% of people who only criticize from the sidelines.
Win or lose is just a phase; whether you can survive long-term in the market is the real ranking.
Let's all keep pushing forward.