This is the same question about whether you wait for the bar to complete or make a decision intrabar. Only the authorities can provide an answer. But for your second paragraph, is it possible that you need to draw a new LTL for those shorter bars moving up the RTL of your present channel?
I wouldn't waste my time posting meaningless questions. I firmly believe that a system should have concrete rules based on price action, and can be numerically described (even if complicated). Any "system" that employs soft, on-the-fly human decisions in the slightest sense cannot be verified at all. Its rules are stochastic in nature, largely determined by the subjective interpretations of the trader. I'm not interested in debunking this work. I see many claims about it, but no one has put in any effort to SYSTEMATICALLY VERIFY the method. If indeed this method requires soft decisions by the trader, it is unverifiable from a quantitative standpoint. The only recourse is to study, put in the screentime, and practice it until it either works for you or you simply cannot make it work at all. Given the available documentation, it seems to me that this method can be captured by hardline quantitative rules. That is my objective at this point. I simply do not understand the method enough to define the rules, that is the information I am seeking in this thread. RoughTrader
Actually, the example I made about the sideways chop wasn't a good one. Quite to the opposite, it seems that if one were to build a channel around the chop starting with a 1-2-3 formation, then you could remain synchronized with it unless it constantly breaks the trendlines of the channel. I apologize, I'm still trying to understand the proper trade timing inside the channels. Roughtrader
If it can't be systematically verified, I'd say that anyone trying to do it with wetware is going to experience mixed results, at best.
Yes, I see your point and have been considering this idea for some time. The channels I have been discussing so far relate to the larger trend channels found intraday. However, many smaller channels can be built inside the larger context. Ultimately, I am trying to understand how the smaller channels provide insight that the larger context channel is changing direction, and trades should be taken appropriately. My hope is that the authorities on this method will provide some commentary in this thread. RoughTrader
There is an issue. Have they generalized channels? What about "channels" that are flat, where people might say that trading is "range bound." These flat channels would be ones where there aren't RTLs and LTLs, but Top and Bottom trend lines, because they are horizontal, parallel and inclined at zero degrees. You see, they haven't considered everything.
Fair enough but from my experiences with Jack and all his buddies is that they are mostly the high academic and nerdy type (no offense) and if it could have been black boxed it would have been by now.
This is simply a manual skill level issue. Anyone can make effectiveness and efficiency considerations to suit their taste. we always recommend working at a particular skill level for a period before moving on to a greater skill level. Optimization is not what is on the table in adjusting, over time to varying conditions. A person has to experience the variety of conditions at each skill level. In SCT, each successive skill level builds on prior levels. A person does not drop one level of skills and go to the next level of skills. I speak of beginner on level 3 as a core. The following five levels are shells around this core. Because the markets are counterintuitive it is very important to be very precise in understanding the operations and operating points of the market. There is no such thing during a trade as looking at the same thing all the way through a profit taking segment. As skill levels are built so is the list of degrees of freedon sets that one steers and focuses upon. It is not possible to look at SCT through the eyes of a person who follows the conventional orthodoxy. This is not a negative statement; it is just a simple matter of fact. when a person comes to the fork in the road vis a vis what market operation paradigm he going to to use to view the market, he simply makes a choice of one or another system. The systems do not overlap very much. Sentiment exists simultaneously on several levels. SCT uses three.