RADAR-PRACTICE · EN · FREE

5. Three decisions and a practice journal

Situation A: investigate using a plan

You have fresh hypothetical information, complete levels and no identified block. Use E = 100, S = 98, T = 104, budget 5 and costs of 0.50 per unit. Record q = 2 and net ratio 1.4. Then explain which exchange parameters are still missing for real execution. A completed practice calculation permits further investigation; it does not oblige you to trade.

Situation B: wait for data

A card has a high Score, but the technical source is old and the current quote is unavailable. Wait for a check instead of replacing a missing price with one from a screenshot. State exactly which data is required and what change would let you revisit the assessment. “Unclear” is less useful than a testable condition for returning.

Situation C: skip

For a long, available E = 105, S = 98 and T = 106 before costs. Potential is 1, risk is 7 and the ratio is 1/7. Even before costs, this is a different plan. Skipping with an explanation is a valid answer. A learner does not need to find a reason to trade every card.

A separate partial-exit example

With q = 2 and E = 100, half exits at 102 and the other half at 104. Gross result is 1 × 2 + 1 × 4 = 6. Hypothetical total costs of 0.50 for each of the two initial units equal 1; net result is 5. This two-exit scenario must not be confused with exiting the entire position at 104 in the preceding module.

For each entry, keep the original snapshot, date, invalidation conditions, costs and explanation. Add a separate outcome column later; do not rewrite the original hypothesis. Separate paper observations, Radar model history and real executions. A reproducible process matters more to a useful review than one attractive result.