Trading against the yourself, muti-tested algos, some very smart retail traders and some even more smarter institutional traders should be enough reason to not add anything else to the equation, to tip the odds against the trader. Creating the above situation (above quote) is so stressful and detrimental, that it would be wise for one to actually have some financial reserves, so as to eliminate the "extremely dependent" scenario. Otherwise, the possibility of success stands very low.
Strings of losses happen (most times) due to sub-par reads. This is not to say that strings of losses are not common, but this is when a trader should realize that re-evaluation is needed, or else the losses continue to mount.
Choppy markets should not be a cause of frustration as one that can read clearly knows that it is time to conserve mental energy and not be stuck in the indecisive fight taking place.
If someone is reading the "herd psychology" portion, most times the smart money is already in and has set itself up with a very tight R:R. For this reason, reading "herd psychology" is easier, as now the "intentions" are more open hand. Guess who is entering here and who has the financial power to jam them if need be.
Reading PA may seem easy, but it is in fact very detailed and delicate. Good PA reading can avoid "frustrated by string of losses or choppy markets" situations to come about.
***I just realized that this response is so off-topic to the O.P's post. Hence, I don't think it would be fair to him/her in serving their purpose in continuing this discussion (maybe have a new thread started). My apologies @Sattam
