Who is right, who is wrong

[WellRozey]

Trading experts on this forum, please shine some light on this argument between a friend and I..

We were talking about the market behaviour that occurred on Oct 10 which made many people lose alot of money, and he said that this is necessary, and the reason why it must happen is because of those same leverage traders.

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

Who do you think is right or wrong.

[Darker45]

Why is there an argument, then? It looks like you have the same positions. You're saying pretty much the same thing. You don't seem to have opposing views.

If there's a huge buildup of longs, the prospect of big profit is so attractive that big players would force liquidations. I don't think market makers aren't involved in the process. They're certainly part of the stop hunt effort. They're certainly part of the group that manipulates the prices to trigger stop-losses, to burn those leveraged positions and make easy money.

[Mrbluntzy]

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

The market makers who manipulates the market to dip and trigger the stop losses of many traders who were longing are the people that will take profits and have a benefit for their act, they also buy at a very low discount level after a lot of traders has already been cleared out, no that they don't want people to make money but them too are after their own profits.

[mustapha67]

The argument is in indeed a tough one with almost the same point of view. Leverage traders make a little investment to gain great opportunities which is related to the point that market makers in their business oriented skills also device dubious ways to take certain advantages where necessary.

Conclusively however, the argument seems to raise a point according to each person's view of what is possible with both categories.

[HONDACD125]

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

So what's the argument about? You both are basically saying different points about the same thing. He says that if there are longs worth a lot of money, the market won't go up, and you say that if there are longs worth a lot of money, market makers don't let the market go up because they don't want to lose money or want others to make a lot of money. In essence, it's the same thing, but you both have different points of views, and both could be correct, because it's not important for different opinions about the same point to have one wrong and one right.

That being said, I personally would say that you have a stronger point, because if market makers allow the market to go in the direction where people have so much money staked, they will have to pay a lot of money to those who make money from it, so they have to do their best to manipulate the prices and drag the market towards the direction where they will have to pay less and get more.

[passwordnow]

Both of you can be either right or wrong. What's the argument all about and why it has started? it doesn't make sense to argue about it when anything can be a reason why the market has been stopped with the progress due to the shorts. Because both leads to market manipulation and that's why it's not progressing as quick as it can be. But even so, we're seeing that the market is recovering and this is the usual way that every after correction has come.

[criptoevangelista]

Excessive leverage needs to be cleaned from time to time, as it is money that "does not exist". A highly leveraged market becomes very dangerous and with an extreme risk of "crash". The movement on the 10th was the biggest in crypto history, surpassing even the pandemic crash, and it's a good thing it happened, as now the market has much more asymmetry to rise in a healthy way.

[coolcoinz]

IMO it's mainly exchanges that destroy the markets. There's some proof by various online investigators that Binance was involved in market manipulation a few times before.

I'll give you a few examples.

In February 2024, BitForex, a cryptocurrency exchange based in Hong Kong, performed a suspected rug pull. Before going dark, an estimated $56.5 million in cryptocurrency was removed from the exchange’s wallets.

https://www.halborn.com/blog/post/explained-the-bitforex-rug-pull-february-2024

Now this money has resurfaced.

An onchain investigation by crypto researcher Eye has linked the mysterious Hyperliquid whale, who controls over 100,000 BTC, to Garrett Jin, the former CEO of BitForex, a now-defunct exchange embroiled in a fraud scandal.

https://www.tradingview.com/news/cointelegraph:bfff9d4e8094b:0-investigation-ties-100-000-btc-hyperliquid-whale-to-former-bitforex-ceo/

If this is true, the owner of an exchange stole 56m USD in crypto and then somehow knew about Trump's tariffs, or just decided to gamble, so he placed a massive short on the exact morning, minutes before Trump's tweet, most likely using stolen money.

The strangest thing about all of this is that such scammers are able to go free and do what they want. At the same time exchanges pare playing you because there were reports that many exchanges decided to close client's short positions during the crash, because they had no more longs to liquidate, so the exchange would have to pay shorters from its own pocket.

It's all a scam people. Don't be greedy and don't play this stupid game. Hold your coins offline!

[2Pizza410000BTC]

Trading experts on this forum, please shine some light on this argument between a friend and I..

We were talking about the market behaviour that occurred on Oct 10 which made many people lose alot of money, and he said that this is necessary, and the reason why it must happen is because of those same leverage traders.

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

Who do you think is right or wrong.

If you want to talk about the market situation of that day and want to know, then you must follow the newsfeed. The market situation of that day was the highest dumping of all time which has never happened before. We have seen some dumping before such as Luna scandal, FTX bankruptcy, Covid, the dumping that day was worse than the dumping that the market had in all these situations, the dumping that day was due to the increase in US taxes with China. When American President Donald Trump announced a 100% tax increase with China, then the market gave the highest dumping and there was a loss of about 19 billion dollars in that dumping. In this case, this news is the reason for the market dumping and the traders are suffering. Moreover, I am not expressing much opinion on what you mentioned here because what you have revealed will not be the reason for so much dumping.

[boyptc]

Who do you think is right or wrong.

If the majority here tells that your friend is wrong, are you going to be happy about that? or if it's the opposite, will you?

I think it's all about a good and healthy discussion that both of you are having. It's okay to disagree having provided some good source of what you are telling to him and him talking about it to you.

IMO it's mainly exchanges that destroy the markets.

Now this is a better answer, that's because every time that we're entering a bear market. It's always them that causes all of these troubles to begin with.

[pooya87]

It doesn't matter if it is right or wrong of if it is necessary to see the dump. What matters is that this recent dump was because of the economic war the US regime started against the rest of the world and the rest of the world is responding to those acts of aggression. For example the recent Chinese retaliation and sanctioning the USA where they banned export of crucial materials to the US that are used in a wide range of industries and the new massive tariffs on US shipments caused the crash in the US markets.

[laijsica]

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

I think this is a misconception. Leverage can make the market more aggressive. If the underlying sentiment of the whales in the market is upwardly mobile. The community with more capacity wins.

[Razmirraz]

We were talking about the market behaviour that occurred on Oct 10 which made many people lose alot of money, and he said that this is necessary, and the reason why it must happen is because of those same leverage traders.

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

Who do you think is right or wrong.

I will try to present a more objective analysis, although both opinions have strong arguments.
The first argument is very valid because leveraged trading can increase market volatility and make prices move more extreme. On the other hand, your opinion also has a strong basis. Market makers also have a vested interest in controlling price movements and maximizing their profits, various strategies will be used to influence market prices (including triggering stop-loss or taking the opponent's position against a leveraged trader).

In this case, I cannot say who is right and who is wrong because both of them chose different paths to the same goal. The most important thing is to understand how the market works and develop effective strategies to deal with situations like this because the system that occurs in the market is very complex and can be influenced by many other factors such as the behavior of traders, market makers and other external factors.

[suhadi88]

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

Who do you think is right or wrong.

The answer depends on market conditions. Just look at BTC price movements. BTC prices always influence people's direction and decisions, and they usually correlate them with real global economic data and current issues. If we focus solely on charts without considering other factors, especially leveraged trading, the potential for liquidation from the exchange is very high.

You are right and he is right too, but the most correct is the one who is quickest to read the situation and conditions and adjust the data to the facts when the trading is carried out.

[lornadane]

From what I’ve seen here, rushing to pick a side is how people get burned. A lot of scammy projects look legit at first, and loud posters aren’t always right. Best move is to slow down, DYOR, and not follow anyone blindly, even high-rank users.

[aysha9853]

Both arguments miss something market makers don’t need leverage traders to lose, they just need volatility leverage creates that volatility, so they use it, october moves looked more like liquidity hunts than some moral fight against traders.

[AVE5]

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

Bitcoin is traded in a global market that's not regulated by any institution or exchange. So if a trader has to loss their trade over leverage funds it doesn't state it was being manipulated by the broker. Of course that can't be possible because there're numerous of exchange platforms where traders carries on their trades while the bitcoin market remains the same. So how possible is it for the whole institutions to work in such pari Passu?
The incident in the reference date was just a coincidence and that's part of the risk of trading and volatility apparently can't be  entirely determined with past events which is also why traders have to interchange on their trading strategies.

[WillyAp]

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

Killing is not true, more giving it some push.
To loose money another one wins it. Or a group of. The ones always winning is the house.
Sounds like gambling does it?

[justinlamode]

Both arguments miss something market makers don’t need leverage traders to lose, they just need volatility leverage creates that volatility, so they use it, october moves looked more like liquidity hunts than some moral fight against traders.

What is volatility and what create the volatility in this context? Market markers liquidity hunt which you mention is actually how the market markets kick the leveraged traders out of the market to place their orders and profit from the market. They need the leverage traders to take their position before compare the buy and sell in the market to decide which direction to go in the short and long term. It is all about balancing the books for them.

[alastantiger]

Trading experts on this forum, please shine some light on this argument between a friend and I..

We were talking about the market behaviour that occurred on Oct 10 which made many people lose alot of money, and he said that this is necessary, and the reason why it must happen is because of those same leverage traders.

He said leverage trading is killing the chances of market surging, if billions are been staked on longs it will be difficult for the market to go that same direction..

I disagree, because I believe that it is those market makers that don't want those leverage traders to win, it doesn't and won't benefit them or they just don't want people to make a lot of money.

Who do you think is right or wrong.

I dont think leverage traders block the market from going up and i also dont think it is some personal move by market makers to stop people from making money. what usually happens is simpler than that. When too many people are positioned the same way with leverage, they leave obvious stop-loss areas behind. Price is naturally attracted to those areas because that is where liquidity is. So on days like October 10th, its just that crowded positions make the market fragile, clearing those positions often comes before any real move can continue. Same reason you will see strong trends still exist but they are messy, shakeouts, liquidations then continuation. Leverage doesnt kill moves, but when everyone leans too hard in one directions, the market usually remidns them who is in control.