We had a sell limit during London open but was not mitigated. I'm expecting New York to manipulate and take out London highs to enter shorts at 4171 targeting 4057 sell side liquidity. Clean 1:7 rr
Gold hit a crucial supply area 4190. We have seen Asia sweep liquidity of previous NY highs at 4196. We have a clear break of structure to the downside. Now waiting for London to retrace to my entry at 4178. Tp1 at 4106 and tp2 at 4057.
I'm starting with $100 and attempting to flip it into $10,000 before the end of July.
I'll be trading Gold CFDs (XAU/USD) using high leverage and posting every trade along the way—the entries, exits, wins, losses, and account updates. Nothing will be hidden.
I know the odds are against me, but I believe it's possible with the right execution and risk management. Whether I make it or blow the account, you'll see the entire journey in real time.
Let's see how far we can take this.
I sent this out yesterday. Trade hit tp 1(860 pips) and now headed to tp 2(1400pips). Just patience and trusting the process
Gold showed rejection from 3942, double bottom and now we have a clear break of structure to the upside. This is a breakout of a trendline, waiting for retest to go long
This isn't for beginners. It's for traders who've been stuck at break-even for months or years and feel like they're not progressing. At some point, you have to ask whether risking 1–2% (or even 3%) per trade is actually moving the needle or just keeping you comfortable. Unless you're trading a very large account, those returns can be painfully slow. I know this is controversial, but I'd rather use bigger lot sizes when a high-probability setup presents itself than spend years trying to compound tiny gains.
One pattern I've personally noticed is that many traders who eventually make it big don't seem to stay ultra-conservative forever. As their confidence in their edge grows, they become far more aggressive on their best setups. The difference is that they're not taking more trades—they're taking better ones. Precision on entries matters a lot. Quality over quantity. If you've built a real edge and have the discipline to wait for A+ setups, selectively increasing your position size can have a much bigger impact than simply taking more trades with minimal risk. That's just a pattern I've observed, and it's what has shaped my thinking.
This isn't for beginners. It's for traders who've been stuck at break-even for months or years and feel like they're not progressing. At some point, you have to ask whether risking 1–2% (or even 3%) per trade is actually moving the needle or just keeping you comfortable. Unless you're trading a very large account, those returns can be painfully slow. I know this is controversial, but I'd rather use bigger lot sizes when a high-probability setup presents itself than spend years trying to compound tiny gains.
One pattern I've personally noticed is that many traders who eventually make it big don't seem to stay ultra-conservative forever. As their confidence in their edge grows, they become far more aggressive on their best setups. The difference is that they're not taking more trades—they're taking better ones. Precision on entries matters a lot. Quality over quantity. If you've built a real edge and have the discipline to wait for A+ setups, selectively increasing your position size can have a much bigger impact than simply taking more trades with minimal risk. That's just a pattern I've observed, and it's what has shaped my thinking.
This setup was as a result of a few confluences.
Today's expansion during Asia and 3985 is at 0.5-0.618 fib levels
Last week's sweep of liquidity
Rsi divergence
Targeting yesterday's New York high 4051 which is buyside liquidity for a 1:8 rr
This is my opinion based on current market structure and is not financial advice
We are at a good buyzone , targeting 4145 liquidity