Well, I hope that you guys are all trading prosperously...! Sorry to have dropped out on the journal like I did. I had come to the conclusion that my head wasn't on straight & that my results had been suffering as a result - at that time I also believed that my state of mind wasn't conducive to good trading going FORWARD. I didn't think that it would be responsible to put out any more 'calls', because there is a remote possibility that some people here take me seriously .
If we return to page 46 of this journal we can revisit the cryptic question "Would anyone care to quantify the relationship between the 'bull' and 'bear' graphs in Exhibit A on the previous page?". During subsequent discussion, I acknowledged that the word 'describe' could certainly be substituted for 'quantify' - thus yielding the simplistic "the bear graph is the bull rotated 90 degrees CW, with the color changed from green to red" as a perfectly acceptable answer. What we as traders concern ourselves with, in the hopes of being consistently profitable, is the understanding and utilization of rational market descriptions. Descriptions may be simple or complex. As a market becomes more efficient, descriptions which yield profit potential within that market become correspondingly more complex. Redneck's take: "100% distribution of the accumulation" was beautiful in its simplicity. It is suggestive of a mindset without preconceived notions about what direction the market SHOULD be traveling. This is the only way to trade. When we can draw rational equivalences between different market states, ignoring the emotional tugs of 'bullishness' and 'bearishness', we have set the table for potential success. "I would call the Bull graph a 0,+1 and the Bear graph a 0,-1.", from page 47, is the simplest way I can think of to use numbers to illustrate the relationship between the two simplified 'Bull' and 'Bear' market graphs. The first numerical descriptor for each graph is a zero, suggesting that an equivalence can be drawn between the price action of the two markets. Essentially, 'zero' identifies prices action which becomes more negative with each successive data point. In the 'Bull' scenario price momentum becomes less and less positive. Likewise, momentum has lessening positivity as we travel x-ward along the 'Bear' graph. Equivalence, expressed by number '0', in a sense. However, I doubt anyone would argue that a buy and hold approach would yield equivalent end games during 'Bull' and 'Bear' markets. (Fortunately, for the sake of this discussion, we have not congregated at EliteBuyAndHolder.com) Obviously, we need a description of differentiation between the two scenarios in order to rationalize having different bull and bear market trading approaches. The second descriptor, '+1' for Bull & '-1' for Bear, provides us with this at a glance: direction and magnitude of trend, expressed as a simple slope measurement. Combination of the two descriptors forms the rudimentary basis of a model: 1) quantification of a trend and 2) description of momentum within that trend. That is the concept behind my simple strategy.
Just figured out that I have a LOT of work to accomplish if I want to restart this thread (programming, etc...).