Sorry not to have responded sooner. I was doing something quite out of character for an ET member: trading. Jack, I am nearly speechless at the fact that you have an engineering education but fail to apply appropriately quantitative tools to the avocation of trading. It is as if you were a practicing engineer but never measured or simulated or tested anything. Limiting the fineness of your distinctions to price up, price down, volume up and volume down amounts to using the coarsest imaginable fuzzy logic. Sure, not too warm, not too cool, not too moist, not too dry works great for climate control, but this is Bitch Market we're triffling with. You must make discrete entry and exit decisions and specific prices and times. What is at play in those decisions, whether you realize or like it or not is at its least complex, binary decision theory, and at its most hellishly complex, multivariate decision theory. Your mentees have such a documented hard time learning from you precisely because you don't teach them this explicitly. Suppose all I have is a digital display of price with no time tags, just a price dial readout. When I make an entry or exit decision, perforce I am using some internalized binary decision mechanism, because I have only one decision factor: is price in some sense low enough or high enough to confidently take a directional position. If I add time, I added a second dimension, is it a good time to trade, making my trading bivariate. If I think in terms of time rate of change of price, or something similar, I became trivariate. Add volume to the mix, and consider partial derivatives of the full data set, and I have a full-blown multivariate decision to make. This ain't cooking, where not too sweet or not too salty is OK. That is why every single line of every single one of my codes drives to a binary decision. Volume is or is not reliably tradeable. The velocity of price is or is not sufficient. Price is or is not within a tick of support or resistance. Volume is or is not in a blowoff condition. Price is or is not in a blowoff condition. Now I am not smart enough to devise a multivariate decision system using those and other quantifications and individual binary decisions, but fortunately the market usually moves sufficiently slowly that an ideal decision making system can be approximated by a sequence of binary decisions. "Volume is tradeable." "Price velocity just went suprathreshold." "Volume holds tradeable." "Oh fuck, volume just went blowoff!" And don't fantasize for an instant that you aren't quantifying. You are just doing so below the level of awareness. The simple act of drawing a price or volume trendline is a quantification. You just don't know the explicit quantitative consequences of the subconscious quantifications you make. Fuck it. I am done with this foolishness. It is like arguing with a rock.
I said I would post a large chart for today. Here it is. Now I'm gone. Got too many other things to work on to waste time talking to rocks.
here is a chart for today and how I see it maybe this can help. I can make it very, very small chart if you wish
Hahahahaha! Thanks! Very enlightening. Are your lines manually or code generated? And I agree that you are more sedimentary than igneous.
Thanks, Tikit. Interesting that yours and the Rock's have some differences, though not major. And thank you, Todd, for your comments. I was not attempting to recreate what you do, since I don't really need it, but to suggest that there may be hard-coded ways to do it. I fantasize that as brainwashed as you all are that you actually see smooth humps of volume, whereas poor literal old me sees extreme spikiness that rarely looks even remotely humpy. That is even more of a problem in much shorter time frames, where I have the delusion that bursts of significant volume ticks are important in suppressing price change (the nagual of the tick level). So I have worked out a crude mensuration method somewhat similar to what I posted. Imagine, if you will, your guasians occurring in a pack on a one-second chart. That is what I capture and run astonishingly arcane analyses on. Or some such bullshit. I love to make it up as I go with you guys, as we have already established that you are charmingly credulous.
Everyone gets their rocks off one way or another... <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fAShQMoNvy8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fAShQMoNvy8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> Have a nice evening Hype
Wow - those charts have nice lines and stuff!! All that stuff Hershey was writing inspired me to look for the fractal ordinate of a multi-variant pulse filter so that I could distill the orthogonal median of a market phase! Then I wrote BIG markers to help me cause I don't know WTF he's talking about! I am sad though that there are not enough lines to obscure the bars though.
No need to suggest. I've been telling you about binary data sets, for what? 6 years? As I said in an earlier post, you should see the next ridge from your vantage point. BTW, I ran across quite the interesting anagram. Almost Alanisly ironic. Dontcha' think? Shoot Um Spy - Spydertrader