Today I chatted with a group of players who specialize in '土狗'.
Their logic is actually very simple:
👉 Pure gambling probability
Divide the funds into many parts,
Specifically looking for low market cap targets (tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands),
Each invest a few dozen U.
The logic is:
As long as you hit one or two dozens of times,
All the losses in the front can be covered, and you can even make a profit.
Sounds smart, right?
But the problem is—
This method is essentially scratching a lottery.
Even more extreme:
Many people don't even look at the project.
Decide whether to buy or not within 1 minute.
In my opinion, this model is very dangerous now.
The reason is simple:
👉 currently in a low liquidity + bear market environment
the market's liquidity is tightening,
who's going to pick up the bags for these 'shitcoins' with market caps in the thousands?
Without incremental funds,
the so-called 'tens of times',
Essentially just survivor bias.
✔️ In a bull market, this kind of play might still hold up
✔️ But at this stage—
👉 Probability game ≠ sustainable strategy
Don't mistake luck for skill.
So what's the real investment logic?
It's simple, three points:
👉 Is there funding
👉 Is there a team
👉 Is there a narrative (trend)
Take the recently popular $Clutch for instance:
Why can it keep dominating the charts?
It's not about 'luck', but because it has a solid fundamental basis:
✔️ Has fund support
✔️ Has pre-sale funds locked in
✔️ Has a 130-member execution team (elite level)
✔️ Has a real community of over 10,000
✔️ Clear narrative: World Cup major event cycle
More importantly—
👉 The project team isn't just telling stories
but it's about practical application:
World Cup event prediction platform = real use case for Clutch
this is the core of a project being able to go the long haul:
it's not about a quick pump,
but has funding, execution, users, and narrative.
If you're serious about surviving long-term in the crypto space:
I suggest you rethink something:
👉 Are you making an 'investment', or are you 'gambling'?
