The Science of Hitting is a book written by Ted Williams, a baseball legend with the highest batting average in history. His approach to hitting later became a core investment philosophy for Warren Buffett.

I first learned about this philosophy through the documentary Becoming Warren Buffett. The idea is simple:

Ted Williams divided the strike zone into different areas, each with its own probability of making solid contact. His job was not to swing at every pitch, but to patiently wait for the ball to enter the zone where he had the highest chance of hitting it perfectly.

Buffett applies the same logic to investing.

In other words, investing is not about swinging at every opportunity. It’s about waiting for the right pitch — and then swinging with full conviction when the opportunity falls squarely within the zone you understand best.

I believe this philosophy still guides Buffett today. Berkshire Hathaway has now gone five consecutive quarters without share buybacks and is sitting on a record $381.7 billion in cash.

This week I came across a tweet that raised an interesting question:

After one year, crypto has essentially gotten everything it asked for. So why hasn’t the market exploded?

→ Something feels off. Doesn’t it?

I don’t think anything is “wrong.”
What we’re seeing is the reality of a market that has grown much larger, where control is gradually shifting toward institutions and large traditional players.

Has the market gone up since the Fed’s first rate cut? Yes.
Has everything gone up in a classic Altcoin season? No.

Gains are concentrated in a handful of projects with real internal strength.

I once described this shift as a bucket full of holes. No matter how much water you pour in, only certain parts of the system actually retain value.

Financial markets are complex systems with many overlapping variables. They are not environments where 1 + 1 must equal 2.

I warned months ago that rate cuts do not automatically mean prices will surge. Markets care about the future, not the present.

Looking at what actually happened this week:

The Fed cut rates by 0.25% and announced an end to QT starting in December. However, Powell explicitly avoided committing to another cut in December. Markets reacted negatively because the future remains unclear.

The U.S. reduced tariffs, and China paused rare earth export restrictions. However, the rare earth agreement only lasts one year, with annual renegotiations. Markets view this as a temporary de-escalation, not a structural resolution. Core issues such as technology, intellectual property, and Taiwan remain unresolved.

From a current conditions perspective, things unfolded largely as expected. But both the Fed and U.S.–China negotiations have successfully kept markets cautious by maintaining uncertainty about the future.

That’s exactly why I reassessed the market and concluded that we may be closer to the top than the bottom. You can revisit that piece for full context.

Being closer to the top does not mean the market will collapse tomorrow or next week. A fire can always burn hotter if more fuel is added before it finally consumes itself.

Additionally, the largest liquidation event in crypto history on October 11 disrupted many market participants and bullish structures. The system needs time to recover.

A true peak or bubble burst may only occur when the Fed eventually raises rates again, or when trade tensions and geopolitical risks resurface at a much higher intensity.

These are not predictions, but scenarios we prepare for in advance.

Last week, we saw a strong x402 wave on Base after it was highlighted in the a16z 2025 report. Before interest in x402 could cool, ERC-8004 emerged as a complementary piece designed to make x402 more practical.

Simply put:

ERC-8004 acts like a digital ID for AI Agent, similar to a national ID card. It helps verify who the agent is, its reputation, and reduces fraud risk. This is a critical puzzle piece for bringing x402 into real-world use.

After digging deeper, I see three investment angles within the x402 stack:

At the moment, only the Facilitator role has a clear and functional model. AI Agent and Seller concepts remain largely experimental, meme-like, or early-stage tests.

The value of Facilitator projects will ultimately depend on whether AI Agent and Seller achieve real product-market fit, because sustainable demand is required to process meaningful transaction volume.

Overall, x402 still lacks a true “Hyperliquid moment” — a psychological and behavioral breakthrough that makes users genuinely trust AI Agent with money. Trust remains the biggest barrier.

I shared a broader framework on x402 in last week’s article. You can revisit it to better understand where this trend stands and how to approach the current wave.

Beyond the main spotlight, here are a few smaller developments worth noting this week:

🖼 The Ivy NFT | Ivy NFT Holder Community:
→ X: @TheIvyNFT
→ NFT Collection: dagora.xyz/ivynft

📈 MarginATM | Trader Community:
→ X: @MarginATM
→ Telegram: t.me/marginatm

😎 Upside | Crypto Investor Community:
→ X: @gm_upside
→ Telegram: t.me/Coin98Insights
→ Tiktok: tiktok.com/@upsidevn
→ FB Group: fb.com/groups/Coin98.Net