MES1! Short — 2026-07-13

Trade Review — Monday, July 13, 2026

I can definitely see the progression in your thinking from Friday to Monday, and it's exactly the kind of progression I'd want to see if I were mentoring someone.

Monday wasn't about making money—it was about proving discipline.

Here's how I would score it using what I think should become the Day Traders Versus standard.

Account Details

Account: [broker] 300K PA ([broker])

Account: Ending 0019

Contracts: 2 MES

Starting Balance: [amount redacted]

Ending Balance: [amount redacted]

Net P/L: +[amount redacted]

Weekly P/L: +[amount redacted]

Status: Green Week Continues

---

RAS (Risk Alignment Score)

RAS: 9.5 / 10

Breakdown

---

RAS Commentary

This is one of those trades where the process scores higher than the opportunity itself.

What stood out:

• ▸You intentionally passed on the impulsive 10:15 selloff because it hadn't confirmed.
• ▸You allowed price to retrace back into your PDA.
• ▸You entered with a pending order instead of chasing.
• ▸You reduced account exposure because the setup wasn't A+.
• ▸You were willing to accept missing the trade instead of forcing one.

Those are professional decisions.

The only deduction comes from narrative confidence.

Throughout the review you repeatedly admitted:

"I wasn't convinced."

When you aren't convinced, that's usually a sign the setup isn't elite.

Ironically...

You handled that uncertainty perfectly.

---

Displacement Grade

Grade: B-

This is a perfect example of why displacement should be graded separately from the trade itself.

Initial Selloff

The 10:15 candle produced genuine displacement.

It:

• ▸displaced lower
• ▸left inefficiencies
• ▸broke short-term structure
• ▸expanded rapidly

That's good.

However...

It immediately began slowing.

---

Acceptance

This is where the grade drops.

Instead of:

Displacement → continuation

we got

Displacement → pause → retracement → pause → grind

That isn't institutional acceptance.

That's distribution.

The market never truly accepted lower prices.

It simply auctioned around them.

---

Final Grade

---

Trade Grade

Grade: A-

Notice...

The trade grade is actually higher than the displacement grade.

Why?

Because you traded the market you had—not the market you wanted.

That's a huge distinction.

---

Why A-

✔ Higher-timeframe narrative aligned.

✔ Risk was intentionally reduced.

✔ Waited for retracement.

✔ Used proper PDA.

✔ Didn't chase.

✔ Didn't average in.

✔ Took profit when momentum slowed.

✔ Protected capital.

---

Why not A+

Two reasons.

1. Weak Acceptance

You said it yourself several times.

Price simply wasn't moving.

The market lacked sponsorship.

You could feel it.

That alone keeps this from A+.

---

2. Conviction

Several comments stood out.

"Didn't really feel great."

"There wasn't enough speed."

"There were signs it could go either direction."

Those aren't criticisms.

Those are observations.

Professional traders recognize those conditions and adjust risk accordingly.

You did exactly that.

---

DTV Execution Grade

---

Overall Grade

A-

---

Coach's Notes

I actually like this trade more than many of your larger winners.

A few months ago, I think you would have:

• ▸chased the first breakdown,
• ▸taken it across multiple accounts,
• ▸convinced yourself it was "obviously" going to continue.

Instead...

You said:

"This is probably a B-/C+ setup."

Then you traded it like a B-/C+ setup.

That is exactly what professionals do.

The market doesn't pay traders for finding perfect setups every day. It pays traders who scale their conviction to the quality of the opportunity.

That may be the biggest improvement I've seen in your trading over the past several weeks.

---

One Addition I'd Make to the DTV Trade Reviews

Since we're now tracking:

• ▸Account Details
• ▸RAS Score
• ▸Displacement Grade

I'd add one more metric:

Conviction Score (CS)

Rate your confidence before entering the trade, independent of the outcome.

• ▸10/10 – "I'd take this in every account."
• ▸8/10 – "Strong setup, minor concern."
• ▸6/10 – "Good enough because risk is reduced."
• ▸4/10 – "Information trade only."
• ▸2/10 – "Probably should pass."

For this trade, I would assign a Conviction Score of 6.5/10.

What's interesting is that your Conviction Score (6.5), Displacement Grade (B-), and Position Size (one account, one contract) all aligned. That consistency is a hallmark of disciplined execution and suggests your decision-making process is becoming much more objective rather than outcome-driven.