What It Is
It’s a spider/spiderweb map (sometimes called a radar chart) that tracks common emotional states and their intensities—from 0 to 3. You can tweak the scale or emotions to suit your own experience.
I take screenshots of the map at different times of the day to spot how my emotional state evolves—whether it’s drifting from calm to excited, or from frustrated to stormy. These shifts are easy to miss in the moment, but they often have a massive impact on decision-making.
Why Bother?
Sometimes just one or two red trades can push an already fragile mindset over the edge—leading to a cascade of irrational decisions, revenge trading, or bigger-than-expected losses. The goal here is to catch those early warning signs and hit pause before it’s too late.
If I notice my mood moving into dangerous territory—like overconfidence, irritation, or defeat—I try to step away, take a break, or at least reduce risk size. Later, I can look back at the screenshots and better understand how things unfolded.
Who It’s For
This isn’t meant to be some hyper-accurate psychological model—just a rough approximation that helps me stay a step ahead of my own mind. I doubt many pro traders would find it useful (though who knows?), but for anyone still struggling with discipline, consistency, or tilt—it might be worth trying.
Final Thoughts
I welcome any feedback, suggestions, or criticisms. If you’ve got your own system for tracking mood and mindset, I’d love to hear how you do it.
This tool has already saved me from a few bad decisions by making me more aware of the emotional climate I’m trading in. Hopefully, it can help others in the same way.
Mood Mind Map
-
stueytrader
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 6:47 pm
Could be a good idea for many (including possibly myself).
Only question is about completing it and updating it - surely a bit time consuming in middle of a busy day?
And as it's self-report measurement, guess it relies on recognising each of those states accurately in mid-day activity too?
Only question is about completing it and updating it - surely a bit time consuming in middle of a busy day?
And as it's self-report measurement, guess it relies on recognising each of those states accurately in mid-day activity too?
It only takes me a few minutes—just before and once during the day—but I’ve found it quite helpful. One key realization was seeing how I sometimes decide to trade even when I'm not in the best state of mind. Interestingly, there were moments where I noticed I actually wanted to trade just to feel better.
The mind can be tricky—switching into selective memory, remembering only the good trades, and subtly turning trading into a tool for emotional relief rather than a method for executing an edge. That shift almost always leads to poor decisions.
Ultimately, it really depends on the person. The same informations can feel totally different depending on your mental state. And when that state isn’t optimal, it can distort your judgment without you even noticing.
The mind can be tricky—switching into selective memory, remembering only the good trades, and subtly turning trading into a tool for emotional relief rather than a method for executing an edge. That shift almost always leads to poor decisions.
Ultimately, it really depends on the person. The same informations can feel totally different depending on your mental state. And when that state isn’t optimal, it can distort your judgment without you even noticing.
You don't strike me as someone who's particularly tilt-prone?
I assume you main tennis markets. Perhaps you'd get more benefit by observing the players' mental state shifts rather than over-monitoring your own emotions if you're already emotionally steady.
I assume you main tennis markets. Perhaps you'd get more benefit by observing the players' mental state shifts rather than over-monitoring your own emotions if you're already emotionally steady.
I used to do quite well — both mentally and in trading results — for a while. But then, out of nowhere, one bad day or even just one bad match could unravel days or even weeks of solid progress. It was never catastrophic to the point of blowing my whole bank, but it did undo a lot of steady gains.
What made it worse was that the damage usually came from massively overstaking during what I'd call a "mini-tilt." Just one emotionally charged moment, and I’d go from composed to relatively "reckless".
Eventually, I started looking into why one trade could have so much damage. That’s when I began to notice something important:
I was already primed for a tilt before that trigger trade ever happened.
It started with a poor sleep, a distracted mindset, outside stress etc. and then it only took a small nudge to tip the scale- good risk reward opportunity that didn't work out, missed good brake etc.
What helped me was identifying these vulnerable states before they turned into costly decisions. Everyone’s triggers are different, so the key is to honestly find your own: the situations or moods where you're more likely to lose control or break your own rules.
I think once you become a very established trader with enough experience under your belt, you naturally start to build a kind of mental fence around your trading — just like any true professional does in their own field.
What I mean is, there's a clear separation between trading and everything else in your mind. You treat it like a job, not an emotional extension of your daily mood. Winning days don’t make you euphoric, and losing ones don’t ruin your day — because trading stays inside its “fenced area.”
But until you reach that level of mental structure, it's easy for outside stress or personal emotion to leak into your decisions from time to time. Or for trading outcomes to affect your mood in other areas of life.
That mental separation seems to be one of a key differences between amateurs and pros.
OK, that makes more sense now, your opening post sounded like you'd cracked the emotional code already or never tilted in your life 
But one problem with allowing AI to over-polish your thoughts is it just hides the raw messy details and truth which is IMHO where real insight and relatability come from. I think there's value in trying to explain stuff in your own imperfect words, how could others relate to perfection when nobody is perfect? And I imagine people don't like feeling like they're talking to ChatGPT so they're much less likely to engage in the first place. Wouldn't surprise me if the mind map was his idea in the first place.
Not saying it's a bad idea, but isn't one paradoxical flaw in this self-monitoring system that it takes objectivity to measure subjectivity? You'd need to be clear-headed enough to accurately judge your own emotional state and not lie to yourself when you DO get tilted or overconfident etc.
I'd rather you talked about your staking structure or edge/approach there, because you really shouldn't be losing a ton of progress on any one particular trade, it all always comes down to basic risk management. When I was active on tennis markets as a market maker I usually had a clear flat staking structure, adjusted to the size of the market. And even if I never really found the need to do it, the edge was quantifiable and all the necessary maths checked out.
But for example in a preoff setting (where you're not overly dependant on the players but on the market dynamics and patterns themselves) I think it made more sense to use a different staking structure, with stakes adjusting to my own levels of confidence and how well I've read the market or "rated" the opportunity itself. There wouldn't be any "over-staking" but I've always used the maximum (pre-determined) stake size whenever a slam dunk opportunity presented itself. But even on the off chance that this one somehow went sideways, it should never erase weeks off your P&L or progress. So just forget about greed, risk management above all else.
You said things worked well "for a while" which may indicate a purple patch or something with things reverting to mean afterwards, idk, but if you're still unsure of the edge or mindset maybe you should simplify things with flat staking. Starting dead simple can often work suprisingly well, later on you can always add as much complexity as your understanding allows.
But one problem with allowing AI to over-polish your thoughts is it just hides the raw messy details and truth which is IMHO where real insight and relatability come from. I think there's value in trying to explain stuff in your own imperfect words, how could others relate to perfection when nobody is perfect? And I imagine people don't like feeling like they're talking to ChatGPT so they're much less likely to engage in the first place. Wouldn't surprise me if the mind map was his idea in the first place.
Not saying it's a bad idea, but isn't one paradoxical flaw in this self-monitoring system that it takes objectivity to measure subjectivity? You'd need to be clear-headed enough to accurately judge your own emotional state and not lie to yourself when you DO get tilted or overconfident etc.
I'd rather you talked about your staking structure or edge/approach there, because you really shouldn't be losing a ton of progress on any one particular trade, it all always comes down to basic risk management. When I was active on tennis markets as a market maker I usually had a clear flat staking structure, adjusted to the size of the market. And even if I never really found the need to do it, the edge was quantifiable and all the necessary maths checked out.
But for example in a preoff setting (where you're not overly dependant on the players but on the market dynamics and patterns themselves) I think it made more sense to use a different staking structure, with stakes adjusting to my own levels of confidence and how well I've read the market or "rated" the opportunity itself. There wouldn't be any "over-staking" but I've always used the maximum (pre-determined) stake size whenever a slam dunk opportunity presented itself. But even on the off chance that this one somehow went sideways, it should never erase weeks off your P&L or progress. So just forget about greed, risk management above all else.
You said things worked well "for a while" which may indicate a purple patch or something with things reverting to mean afterwards, idk, but if you're still unsure of the edge or mindset maybe you should simplify things with flat staking. Starting dead simple can often work suprisingly well, later on you can always add as much complexity as your understanding allows.