I may be mistaken but it seems as though Jack is saying "if we close outside the LTL then we will have m1 and m2"....
Another great call from wrong way Hershey!!! <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2656562>
Actually, Jack, it seems to be a measure of the quality of your market calls more than anything else.
Before the VE there is an LTL. Then a VE results in an annotation whereby a parallel line is cloned from the original LTL. The cloned line is placed on the extreme of the VE bar (last VE if more than one happens). This creates a zone between the two parallel lines. So, David is correct to say anywhere outside the original LTL will be where to look. I simply state this condition as a close which is in the zone. The term "outside the LTL" is another expression for being in the zone.
Thanks to both of you for giving me another opportunity to comment on that weekend in November. For context, please refer to the comments I made at the time. Gucci also reminded me of my responsibilities. I rarely make market calls as those who read my commentary know. When I do, their basis is the PEP and its applications in PVT, SCT, and SSR. On the close of the Friday in question my comment was to inform that a pattern had not been completed as the weekend begun. It was simply a courtesy to those who deal with the contemporary pattern. Recently, there was a short channel coming to an end. Rather than just say it would be around "settlement" of that Wednesday, I posted the the P, V moves that would be preceding the end of the channel on the fractal I trade on Tuesday. I do a write up, daily of what the various fractals did with respect to the pattern of PEP and its applications. It allows me to summarize the current state of the market at the end of the day. This info, in turn, allows a person to enter the next day's open according to the order of events of the various nested fractals. as a debrief, I often fill in the next day's summary sheet as preparation for the next day. This givs me the trades that are coming up and they are in the order of their appearance. At the top of each day's sheet there is the news events and the data sets for those events in 9 columns. I have weighted values for their significance and I know the moves and their durations for each of these news items. By blending my next day's trades with the relative impact and duration of wieghted news, I feel ready to trade the next day. None of that was of interest to those whose trade different paradigms or different fractals when I posted the day iun advance where the end of a channel was coming up. I agree that these persons would reject my comments since they are not helpful in any way. It just seems to me that most people work hard to keep in the context of what works for them and that context is different in many ways than what I do. As you suggest, people dissagree with my calls and the reason they do is that they compare their views with my views. Our views are largely incompatible since the basis of comparisons has no commonality. Some people spend years posting their opinion on incidents in my life. Their views are based on their beliefs which come from their long term memory in their minds. I post in response to questions asked of me and to opinions of me that are extemely off base. I feel that, if a person make an extremely off base comment, then I might want to respond with facts instead. With respect to the weekend in question please read my prior comments primarily to Gucci. With respect to my calls on Tuesday , compare the calls to the subsequent events on Wednesday. For your convenience use the correct instrument and the correct bar duration and correct bar type. Most recently on that Tuesday, I responded to a jug with a crosseyed face on it that was stated to be a representation of my first disciple. I stated roughly: "These are the trades for tomorrow on the 5 minute ES." and I attached my debriefing notes for the next day. Subsequently I followed up with charts and logs that verified each of the calls I made. In summary, 4 out of 5 people have a good basis for rejecting my comments. I trade one paradigm; they trade another. They compare me to their paradigm standard and reject what I do based on their standard which does not overlap their standard in any way. My calls happen to keep me in the market all the time and on the right side of the market. I trade using reversal partial fill reversals that result from market orders. Most people use an entry/exit approach. These people are often on the sidelines and often they use what are called edges and protection for their predictions. I do not predict. My calls are based on deduction from the use of a paradigm and its parametric measures. Ivanovich's judgments are off base. That means they are incorrect and unreasoned. I like the humor of trader666. He is very funny and very very repititious.
Jack, I know a prominent trend follower who has been sending out real nice steaks for many years for holiday gifts. If you send me steaks I will retract my gibberish comment. Deal?
Of course, the possibility exists that the term "smart money" refers to a specific indicator (namely stretch-squeeze), that has a binary value. Then the statement: "Smart money is short over the weekend" may be considered simply a factual remark about the value of the above mentioned indicator as of the market close, made in passing, as opposed to the actual market call. But then again, the amount of intellectual effort involved in considering all possibilities is much more then the average reader is willing to expand these days, eh, comrade
"There are two types of people in this world- those who stand up and face the music and those who run for cover... Cover is better..." (Al Pachino, Scent of a woman)
Jack, I attach a clip from today's carryover with the gap adjusted. My olive p3 was formed by today's opening bar (an outside bar when gap adjusted) and I cloned the olive rtl to my p2 at 15:55 yesterday. Price VE's this LTL at 09:40 today and clearly closed outside the LTL so I was expecting an m1 m2. Clearly this did not happen and it appears that price forms a new r2r to take me from orange p1 to p2. Have I annotated this incorrectly? I am thinking that there must be a way of differentiating a new r2r from a 2r2b (m1 m2). I am approaching this from the standpoint that IF I know to expect an m1m2 then I would HOLD until the FTT arrived.