Why is it that the longer you research a coin, the harder it becomes to maintain an objective judgment about it? When I first entered the market, I thought the deeper the research, the heavier the position, the more reasonable it was. I read the whitepaper, listened to team interviews, got familiar with the community, and naturally felt like I understood it better than others. But later, I realized that research increases knowledge, but it also creates emotional attachment. I used to track a project long-term, knew every upgrade, partnership, and token unlock, and could even explain every delay on behalf of the team. When the price dropped, I stopped reassessing and instinctively looked for positives to prove I wasn’t wrong. While others saw weakening trends, I saw “the market just doesn’t understand it yet.” The more time you invest, the harder it is to admit that your research conclusions might be invalid. Selling isn’t just about cutting losses—it feels like denying months of effort. So, the position gets heavier, the sources of information become narrower, and in the end, you’re not holding on because the project is more certain, but because you’re already in too deep. Truly mature research must allow conclusions to be overturned. Regularly ask yourself: If I were seeing this for the first time today, would I still buy it? If I didn’t hold any, how would I evaluate this data? Familiarity can reduce the unknown, but it can’t eliminate risk. Remember: The most dangerous position isn’t necessarily the coin you don’t understand—it’s the coin you’re so familiar with that you start justifying everything about it.