The issue of 1% risk

the issue of 1% risk (% risk to equity to be exact) is not about handling the emotions of potential dollar loss relative to account size

it is the limitation from 1) requirement of funds (net liquidation value) for the position sizing to execute the trade, 2) the high concentration of funds within just 1-3 names in your portfolio because you will be margined beyond 100%, especially if you positioned on low ADR% names. the reason here is the stop loss distance because you wouldn't have a wide stop beyond 1-ATR if you swing trading to make a singular trade size significant in profits term but within fixed % risk control.

don't take my word for it, this is a very simple exercise to do on spreadsheet yourself. put up 3 trading ideas of various ADR%, design your entry price, stop loss price in consistent manner, then use 1% risk to calculate the sizing required based on a account value eg. $100,000. Next, based on the sizing and entry price, determine the $ amount required of your account to execute this trade and set put a % as '% to net liquidation value'.

you compare the % to NLV based on 3 different ADR% ideas. it may make you rethink about your trading in terms of risk implementation, trade selection and money management if you believe in trading with a law of large numbers and probability in mind

1% may not even be a viable trade on $NVIDIA(NVDA)$ if u trade tight. the position sizing may require 100% of your funds on just 1 position alone. nothing to do with win/loss ratio. It's about viability to execute the trade based on the pre determined sizing