Whether the four-year cycle still exists is a hot topic of debate in the community. On one side are those shouting "the cycle is dead," believing that Bitcoin's size has grown, the macro environment has changed, and the old four-year pattern should be obsolete. On the other side are those citing historical data, pointing to bottoms every few years on the K-line charts, insisting that the cycle hasn't changed.

Ben's examples are quite practical. In 2022, the market bottomed out, as it did in 2018. Going further back, the 2020 crash due to the pandemic created an even deeper dip, but the rhythm still roughly follows a low point every four years. These points are not arbitrarily drawn after the fact.

Interestingly, he emphasizes that this is not unique to Bitcoin. Bitcoin itself does not create cycles, but it is indeed highly sensitive to the current market. In his words, Bitcoin is more like it can "sense" market weakness. That is to say, Bitcoin is not the origin of the cycle but a reflection of the cycle in asset prices. This shifts the debate from "Does the Bitcoin cycle still exist?" to "Is the market cycle still effective?"

In other words, the behavioral patterns of market participants haven't changed. The four-year span coincides with the human emotional rhythm of panic, greed, and panic again. The macro narrative and policy environment have changed, but people's aversion to losses and desire for quick wealth haven't evolved enough to break this rhythm. $ETH