@Arslan Awan @Jonathan Barton @Bowen Hackett @Corey Taylor @Heidi Yang @Christoph Giesinger @Anthony Carson @Danny Mez @Harvey Rock Hey, just a quick message to let you all know that I will not be available online from tomorrow for a few days including the weekend. Unfortunately I will be putting my 16 year old dog, Archie, to sleep on Thursday, and for my mental health I'm going to take a few days off to grieve and decompress. I appreciate your understanding.

I had a question about targets and what is their purpose. As I was replying it became a bigger answer so I thought I'd make it into a proper post and post it here. I'll also add it to the course. My thoughts are: A target isn't necessarily an instruction to close the trade. It is a definition of what you expect the trade to accomplish. It's an important distinction between trade management and trade planning. The simplest way I can think of to explain it is: When you choose a target, you're answering: "If I'm right about this entry, where should price reasonably go before I expect the opposing side to become relevant?" That gives the trade a destination. It doesn't necessarily mean: "When price reaches this exact level, I MUST close." A target isn't there because the market must stop there. It's there because you need to know where your trade thesis is taking you. Think about driving somewhere. If I say: "Let's drive north." That's not a plan. If I say: "We're driving to Brisbane." Now we have a destination. But if we get to Brisbane and we decide to now change plans and now go to the Sunshine Coast, that's possible. What would be dangerous is getting in the car saying: "We'll just see where we end up." This is where we need to distinguish between the original trade thesis becoming invalid and simply getting a new signal. Suppose: Long entry → target above → invalidation below. If you subsequently get a valid CE → CE short setup before the long reaches target, you have new information. The question isn't: "Did I reach my target?" It's: "Does the new setup invalidate or override the reason I was holding the original trade?" If your strategy says the opposite CE → CE is a legitimate change of bias, then yes: Close long → take short. The target didn't become useless. The target told you where you originally expected the long to go. The market simply gave you new information before it got there. So you have to decide beforehand what your target actually represents.

We're in the trading space, and unfortunately, that means there will always be people out there trying to scam you, including by impersonating me. If you ever receive a message offering trading advice, signals, or an "investment opportunity" — stop before you respond. (I have included some attempted scam profiles here) Here's how to check it's really me: 1. Click on the profile of whoever messaged you. 2. Compare it against my actual profile in this community. 3. If it doesn't match — it's not me. 4. Report the fake profile immediately so we can get it removed and protect other members. Still not sure? Reach out to me directly through my verified profile here in the community and ask. I'd always rather answer ten "is this really you?" messages than have one member get scammed. One rule that will never change: I will never DM you first offering advice or investment opportunities. Ever. If a message like that lands in your inbox claiming to be from me, it isn't. No exceptions. Stay sharp, look out for each other, and when in doubt - verify before you trust.

https://www.skool.com/tradingmadeeasy/classroom/5cc92bf0?md=5397a270bf8941c196c94281702f32f7 Lot sizing, Invalidation levels, Algo paths and seeing the future

Just a follow up from what was mentioned before the class started today. @Arslan Awan has prayer time at the same time as our second session of the week. So the request is if everybody is happy could we move both sessions 24 hours earlier? So that means we have a Monday session and a Thursday session at the same times as currently. I will also throw in some extra pop-up sessions whenever I can as well. Please reply to this post if that works for you and we will go with the majority. (Extra credit if you can reply with a cool GIF if you are in the affirmative)