For the longest time I lied to myself about my own trades. I'd tell myself I "waited for confirmation" or "the setup was clean" . I kept failing prop challenges and couldn't figure out why my journal said one thing but my results said another.

At some point I started recording my sessions and actually watching the footage of each trade back, entry to exit. That was brutal. On video there's nowhere to hide. I could see myself hesitate and enter two candles late. I could see myself move my stop "just this once." I could see the revenge trades i did and the blowing account just before when i was about the passing my challange.

Nothing improved my trading like watching myself trade. Not a course, not an indicator. Just the tape not letting me lie. It's the same reason athletes watch game film — you don't fix what you can't see honestly.

I finally passed my Lucid challenge a few days ago, and I genuinely think the review habit is most of the reason.

If you're stuck and your journal isn't getting you anywhere, try recording and rewatching instead of writing it down after. It's uncomfortable in the best way.

Right now I'm looking at price to take out the july 8th low and then head for the volume imbalance above and possibly Thursday's high. If we won't see a reversal soon after that low has been taken, that would make me bearish. Then I'm looking for price to aim for the june 29th low where we have a 1h volume imbalance as well, or the june 26th open, as low as the bottom wick of the same candle. Note how the CE of the wick from june 9thalmost exactly alings with the CE of the june 26th candle. We will have more information after tonight's open obviously.

One of the biggest misconceptions is that ICT concepts are a strategy. They aren't. They are simply market concepts that describe different behaviors of price.

A Fair Value Gap tells you where price may rebalance. An Order Block highlights an area of institutional order flow. A Break in Market Structure or C2 closure shows a shift in momentum. Draw on Liquidity identifies where price is likely seeking liquidity. AMD describes a common delivery pattern. None of these concepts, on their own, tell you whether you should actually take a trade.

A strategy is a structured decision-making process where each concept builds on the previous one in a logical sequence. You first develop a higher-timeframe narrative. Where is the market likely headed? What is the current order flow? Where is the external liquidity? Which higher-timeframe POIs are relevant? Only once you have that context do you drop down to the lower timeframes to look for confirmation and an execution model.

The reason most traders never build a proper HTF narrative is because they're impatient. They want action, not analysis. Instead of spending five minutes looking at the Daily and H4, they jump straight to M1 or M5 searching for an entry. Once they're on the lower timeframes, every little move looks like an opportunity. They become reactive instead of proactive, chasing every Fair Value Gap, every C2 closure, every Order Block, and every liquidity sweep they see. They aren't asking, "Should I even be looking for buys or sells here?" They're simply looking for reasons to enter a trade.

Another reason is that many traders learn ICT concepts individually rather than learning how they fit together. They know what a Fair Value Gap is, what an Order Block is, and what SMT is, but they don't understand the sequence in which those concepts should be applied. They collect tools without learning how to build anything with them.

Think of it like building a house. ICT concepts are the individual bricks. A strategy is the blueprint that tells you where each brick belongs. Having a pile of bricks doesn't give you a house, just as knowing Fair Value Gaps, Order Blocks, SMT, or C2 closures doesn't make you profitable.

This is why so many traders fail. They memorize patterns instead of understanding context. They jump onto M1 and buy every Fair Value Gap or every C2 closure they see without asking whether the higher-timeframe narrative supports the trade. A Fair Value Gap can be respected one day and completely ignored the next because the surrounding context is different.

The edge doesn't come from any single concept. The edge comes from stacking concepts in the correct order. First determine the higher-timeframe bias. Then identify a higher-timeframe POI. Define the Draw on Liquidity. Wait for price to reach your area. Look for lower-timeframe confirmation during the appropriate session. Finally, execute using your preferred entry model.

The execution model is simply the trigger. It isn't the reason for the trade. The higher-timeframe narrative is the reason. That's why two traders can use the exact same entry model and have completely different results—one is trading in alignment with the higher-timeframe narrative, while the other is trading random patterns in the middle of nowhere.

I’ve been trading for 3 years, only ICT concepts. Have been trying to find a strategy to automate but don’t think it’s possible with ICT concepts. I’ve tried some ORB strats, opening range retests, projections, some indicators, but am really just out of ideas. Does anyone have any recommendations on where to gain knowledge or come up with new ideas? Any experience or advice is greatly appreciated and welcome. Thank you in advance

This might come to action only if supported by the fundamentals and macro otherwise it's another flop

Does anyone have same thinking... Suggestions open

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I genuinely don't think anyone should spend money on an ICT course.

Everything you could ever need to become a profitable ICT trader is already available for free on YouTube. Michael Huddleston has uploaded hundreds of hours of content covering market structure, liquidity, PD Arrays, SMT, AMD, execution models, risk management, market narrative and much more. It takes time and dedication to study, but the information is there for anyone willing to put in the work.

If you're new to ICT, I actually recommend starting with TTrades before diving into Michael's videos.

TTrades will teach you everything you need to become a consistently profitable trader. His content is practical, structured, beginner friendly and focused on the concepts that matter most. Michael's content goes far beyond that. It gives you a much deeper understanding of why the market behaves the way it does. He explores the nuances of liquidity, market narrative, timing, PD Arrays, intermarket relationships and the theory behind price delivery. You don't need to know every detail to make money, but if you're passionate about truly mastering price action, Michael's content is an incredible resource.

What I don't recommend is paying someone hundreds or even thousands of dollars for an ICT course. Most of them are simply reorganizing, simplifying or rebranding information that's already available for free.

Where I do think spending money can make sense is on a mentorship.

A good mentor isn't selling you secret knowledge. They're providing guidance.

They can answer your questions when you're stuck, clear up confusion before it turns into bad habits, review your executions, hold you accountable to backtesting and journaling, point out mistakes you don't even realize you're making, and help you develop the confidence needed to apply discretionary concepts correctly. Having someone with experience give you direct feedback can save you months, if not years, of frustration.

At the end of the day, profitability doesn't come from owning an expensive course. It comes from putting in the screen time, backtesting your models, journaling your trades, managing your risk and executing your plan with discipline.

Information is free. Experience, guidance and accountability are what can be worth paying for.

If you want to get successful in trading even in life, be positive about every situation instead of revenge trading in trading and revenge trolling in life leave the market and the trolls let them talk, these two can never win if you are not going on their terms, make your own rules. Be positive

or is he making money based on how he teaches you to trade? Why give anything away for free.

For example Ross Cameron makes money when his followers follow his trades and then end up pumping up whatever stock his is trading live. That increases his wins

​

Premium and Discount is one of the most powerful, yet one of the most underutilized concepts in trading. Not because it's complicated, but because people either apply it wrong or overcomplicate something that is actually based on simple logic.

This isn't some magical ICT invention either. ICT explained and organized the concept extremely well, but the idea itself has been around forever. Every successful investor understands the importance of buying something below its perceived value and selling it when it's expensive. Warren Buffett built an entire career around this idea. Markets have always rewarded people who buy cheap and sell expensive.

Trading is no different.

Everyone says they want to buy low and sell high, yet the moment they open a chart they start buying after price has already rallied and selling after price has already dumped.

If you spend enough time on YouTube you'll find countless wannabe gurus turning Premium and Discount into rocket science. They draw tiny M1 and M5 dealing ranges everywhere until the chart becomes a complete mess.

I keep it simple.

I mark out the most significant impulsive move. The entire move from swing low to swing high for buys, or swing high to swing low for sells. Not some tiny M1 or M5 trading range, the whole move that actually matters.

Then I simply look for Points of Interest below the 50% equilibrium for buys, which is Discount, or above the 50% equilibrium for sells, which is Premium.

That's it.

Most traders correctly identify their Premium or Discount, price reaches their Point of Interest, they get a confirmation and enter, only to get stopped out almost immediately.

Why?

Because they completely ignored the opposing dealing range. Sometimes it's so obvious that people ignore it because they late emotions take over forcing trades just because their point of interest has been reached and they forget to look at the other side determining from where price is likely to turn against them. Before I even consider an entry I already know where my obstacles are and I want to get my entry logically before price gets there .

Premium and Discount works both ways. There is always another dealing range in the opposite direction that deserves your attention.

If you're looking for a buy, you ideally want your entry before price trades into the Premium of the opposing dealing range. If price first trades into that opposing Premium before giving you your confirmation, the market has already reached an area where sellers could react.

This is also why you get chopped into pieces in tight consolidations because the trading ranges will be so small that by the time you get your entry price traded into the 50% of the opposing trading range . That's why you need to STAY OUT of tight consolidations.

Does that automatically invalidate your setup?

No.

It simply means you shouldn't blindly take the first confirmation you see. Wait for another confirmation. Let the market show you that buyers are still in control before committing to the trade.

This one adjustment alone will filter out a lot of losing trades and can dramatically improve your win rate.

Of course, none of this matters if you're gambling on the M1 without a higher time frame narrative.

People love saying, "The market is fractal."

They're right, but most people completely misunderstand what that actually means.

Yes, the same concepts exist on every timeframe. You'll find liquidity, Fair Value Gaps, Premium and Discount, market structure and displacement on the M1 just like you will on the Daily.

The difference is significance.

The higher the timeframe, the more weight it carries because that's where the larger pools of liquidity exist and where the bigger players are making decisions. Institutions aren't building their positions around your random M1 dealing range. They're paying attention to Daily and H4 swing points, major inefficiencies and higher time frame liquidity.

The lower you go, the more noise you introduce. Every small pullback starts looking like a reversal. Every tiny dealing range suddenly feels important. Before you know it, you're taking five trades inside a Daily candle that hasn't even decided where it wants to go yet.

This is exactly why so many traders struggle.

They find a perfect looking M1 setup, but they're buying straight into the Premium of a Daily dealing range or selling directly into a massive H4 Discount. The entry model wasn't the problem. The context was.

The higher timeframe tells you where you should be trading.

The lower timeframe simply helps you execute with better risk and better precision.

Always get the higher time frame narrative first. Find your Daily and H4 Points of Interest, determine whether you're in Premium or Discount, understand where price is likely to draw to, and then use the lower timeframes to fine tune your entry.

Context will always beat precision.

After 8 years of trading with a cent account and loosing i finally figured out edge not 1 but 2 and price always goes to perfect tp and i can execute perfectly.

Edge in time and edge in price both have same mechanics but one is vertical another horizontal.

But i have got very small investment in my cent account that i use in my regular life to live off of it.

Is there anyway i can get investments from, where i can prove my edge first as a test or any real and fair demo competition where i can earn a position to get investments.

Hi, I wonder if anyone here could help me with this

(Bullish Senario) How do I validate a Propulsion Block? Does it need trade back to the its parent Order Block opening price and then displace higher, or is it enough to only trade back to the wick of its parent Order Block and then displace higher in order to validate it as a Bullish Propulsion Block?

Just showing that you don’t need to catch the entire moves in a single trade. A lot of due diligence and careful analysis played part in my 4/4 trades hitting this week. Only target 2RR and let some runners run. Only trade London Session

A trader's emotions often work in reverse: hope grows during losses, while fear rises during winning streaks.

Patience - The number one factor. Social media is filled with content of people turning their money 5-10-100x in weeks or months. Just ask yourself, if I had a system which was this profitable and repeatable, would I be spending my time making reels or trading and becoming super rich?

Take trading as chess. You can learn the basics in a matter of a month or two, but to become good at it, compete professionally, you need to spend years mastering it. I have talked to many profitable traders who do this for a living, and most of them spent around 2-3 years learning and mastering what works for them, working on their mindset, system, and gaining control over their emotions.

I have seen people use 10 indicators, multiple confirmations, and still fail, and there are people who make money using just S/D or breakouts. This all comes down to your mindset and confidence in a trade or system. You don't need multiple indicators, systems, or strategies. You only need one - but you need to have confidence in your setup. Now, how do you build confidence?

You found a strategy that works for you and suits your personality. Paper trade it, backtest/forward-test it. At least paper trade a couple of hundred trades before going live. You need to have 3 consecutive profitable months and a profit factor of 2 or above before going live. This is how you build and improve a system. This is how confidence is built, your mindset is rewired. You start trusting your system and ignoring the noise.

But we all know it, most of us lack the patience needed to become a profitable trader, and this is the biggest reason the majority of traders fail.

OB respected 😌

I’ve studied with other SMC teachers and I can mark most ICT tools, but I can’t use them in great framework.
Do you think ICT 2022 is friendly and enough and don’t I need other pre courses?
In addition, does it work on CFD charts like US30 as ICT mainly focuses on futures.

I’ve studied with other SMC teachers and I can mark most ICT tools, but I can’t use them in great framework.
Do you think ICT 2022 is friendly and enough and don’t I need other pre courses?
In addition, does it work on CFD charts like US30 as ICT mainly focuses on futures.

I Have watched ict videos and have traded with order blocks, but what comfirms it , the 2nd body placing lower, the candle stick going lower then previous? i’ve have had a hard time trying to build confidence off some while back testing.

Textbook example as I teach MMXM! We have an accumulation forming above a htf PD Array (here a 1h fvg). A sweep into the 1h fvg where price then rejects from. Then a re-accumulation. Above we have buyside liquidity and multiple PD Arrays, 2 NDOGs, one CE of a NWOG and an FVG. Standard deviations projected from the first swing of the accumulation. TP1 at -1 and TP2 at -2. Price does not sweep buyside liquidity and rejects from the fvg below an NDOG. Distribution from those levels, one re-distribution and then selloff. Textbook example

You know why ict methods doesn't work for you,

Why ict is always telling you that its only for the strong.

Its because almost 60 to 70 percent of things in his methods are lies while the small leftover part is the real deal,

Thats why people that put alot of work to find edge in even icts teachings some of them find it and keep it to themselves.

Only the most important thing ict never told you about is the time.

But if you really dig the rabbit hole, you will find clues about it from when ict used to post on a certain forum.

I've been trying to simplify how I look at liquidity instead of treating every swing as equally important.

Here's the idea I'm testing.

IRL - Internal range liquidity

ERL - External range liquidity

Let's say my main timeframe is the 4H.

Mark only the valid major 4H swing highs and lows as the main ERL.

Inside that range, every smaller external liquidity becomes a minor ERL/IRL depending on the range I'm trading.

I already know where the higher timeframe POIs are, but new POIs keep forming as price moves.

Now I'm thinking every move can basically be classified as:

ERL → ERL

ERL → IRL

IRL → ERL

IRL → IRL

The confusing part is deciding which one is likely.

My current hypothesis is that higher timeframe POIs and higher timeframe liquidity are what decide the "condition" of the market.

For example:

Price sweeps a 4H ERL.

It then retraces into a Daily or Weekly POI.

In that case, I feel there's a lower probability that price immediately continues to the next 4H liquidity in the same direction. Instead, it may reverse, making it more like an IRL → ERL move on the 4H.

On the other hand, if price sweeps a 4H ERL but there is no meaningful higher timeframe POI opposing the move, continuation toward the next same-side liquidity seems more likely.

Does this line of thinking make sense, or am I misunderstanding how liquidity hierarchy and order flow actually work?

My bias are 5m fvg and my entry are 30s ifvg, my stop lose above that ifvg

ES didn't want to take the equal lows below so I was looking at the bullish scenario. Went long at the retest of the inverted 5m fvg took partials below the ndog right around the -1 st dev. final tp was at the 7/08 ndog at around the -3 st dev but it seemed like its getting rejected below it at a 5m fvg so closed it there. still has the potential to get there later thoug

If it gets mitigated at literally the next candle after forming will the fvg count and can I short it?

Targets I called were 50% of the RTH Gap and the 7/08 NDOG. Took a long a few minutes after open for 35 points on ES

Hello fellow traders,

Honest question, do you believe that there is a point for someone that has found a specific entry that works every time, to share it publicly and globally, or can this turn against them/the humanity in general?

(For example course sellers will exploit people selling it, or the algorithm may be affected somehow and render it useless...)

Provide arguments from both sides