DislikedI tend to like systematic approaches, since they cancel out a lot of the "required" psychology. If you got a working system, the only trait you need is discipline in carrying out the signals again and again and again.Ignored
One of the big things you see over and over on these forums is the "I have to be right all the time" syndrome. It's in the "systems" threads: 80, 90, 100% successful trade rates (claimed, anyway) are what get the attention. It's in the interactive threads: "I held through 150 pips against me, but it finally came back and I 'won' the trade."
Systematic approaches, particularly 'following' or 'positioning' strategies, often are built with expectations of 70% losing trades, but with a Pareto distribution of single-trade P&L. Market makers on options floors and futures pits often sustain such levels, and go to their homes in Barrington Hills or Lake Shore Drive or Greenwich every night at ease with the world and a little bit richer month after month.
That takes real psychological fiber to sustain high percentages of losing trades. That's one reason why those strategies lend themselves to automation: not only is it then 'out of your hands', but many bad trades are made out of, well, boredom and the need for the adrenalin, as well as feeling of having been wronged and needing some "revenge trades."