Give preparation a consistent shape
A repeatable process starts with a small set of questions. What is the opportunity? What evidence supports it? What is the opposing case? What would invalidate the idea?
Using the same questions helps expose gaps. It also makes it easier to compare two setups without changing the standard simply because one feels more compelling.
Define the boundaries in advance
The plan should describe the conditions that matter before the outcome starts influencing the story. Allocation, entry context, exit conditions and reasons to pause belong in that preparation.
Momentum’s approach treats these boundaries as part of the idea itself. A direction without a clear account of the downside is an incomplete plan.
Keep attention on what changed
During a review, distinguish between an ordinary price fluctuation and a change to the original thesis. The relevant question is what the new information means for the conditions you set out.
A connected view of research, planned boundaries and activity makes it easier to revisit the decision without relying on memory alone.
Review the process as well as the result
A favourable result does not prove that every part of the reasoning was sound. An unfavourable result does not, by itself, show that the process was careless. Both deserve a closer look.
Record what was known, what was assumed and what could be improved. Over time, that record gives a review more substance than a collection of isolated outcomes.