right on. I was suggesting that the rocket is the low risk beginner only allowable trade until a profit that is a multiple of the i unit initial trading capital. the PM BO ranks along with the rochet if it is as you described. Your very salient point is that you SEE that the prior centering on VDU volume happens remotely from either S or R. There are three basic places ion the price map where BO's occur. The beginner low risk single location is the "neutral part of the map that is "away" from R and S. Obviously the backtesting for BO's has to include and define which of the three regions in which the BO is taking place. The Bracket is the safety value for all three locations, of course. take alook at further refining the BO entry from the sidelines. You have it straight that the rate of change of volume is the trigger(implied at least). Do BO's ever test R or S? Do they ever successfully test R or S? what is the factor that they over come if they do not turn into FBO's? It there a connection between the sequencing of the kinds of trends? What is the most likely trend after a money making trend? Do several money making trends occur in sequence. How do you change the hold/reverse sequencing signal regime when you have gone from a money making trend to a latral trend (inwhich you also make the otrntial the market offers you/). Now we can see that under various eMF's (electromotive forces, so the speak), that a lot of energy is involved when a lateral channel is a channel that is testing an R or an S as compared to the "starting energy" required to leave the RR station situation i am going to treturn to the axy and ABC stuff shortly. this thread is a good one to deepen the genral conversation about the market and how to "know" it. I am also nailing down what has to be done to move into a rational level of backtesting. no one can ever consider backtsting if they do not start right at the level of the interaction of the trader and the market whereby the backtesting includes the division of responsibilities accurately and also exactly when the monitoring and analysis shifts are taken into account very thoroughly with respect to coarse, medium and fine monitoring and analysis. There is not such thing as backtesting on one level of fineness. There are always at least three levels. furthermore the "what wasn't that' is often where the signals come from that are indicators of automatic shift levels. Can you imqgine what a prop shop would look like if theere was a main focus on the markets operation instead of "anomolies". lol.
Oh, Jack, don't go there. You don't know shit about backtesting, and you embarrass yourself every time you talk about it with those of us who DO. Some of your stuff is brilliant (note that I said SOME), but it is NOT testable. At least by any testes likely to be posting here. You are a superb visualizer, the best here IMO, but don't fantasize for an instant that what you do is less than intuitive. BTW, your intellectual virtue is safe, I won't be in Tukson after all. Maybe next time. My apologies to the boys.
Jack, are you still working on that Trading Book? This is a rhetorical question - I know you're not and will never be. You derive much more pleasure in personally delivering the material in a random piece by piece manner. Plus any editor would throw it in the garbage if you wrote it in the style and structure you use in your posts.
Sunny. If Jack were to write a trading book, it would be H&S above anything on the market. I have offered to co-author and edit it for him. You know, tighten the logic up a bit, make it so anybody can understand it. Maybe even provide some BT proofs. Embed a few esoteric jokes for the exoteric crowd to miss. Since I have been a published author for 30 years on a subject far more complex than trading, I think the two of us would make a great team. I invite Jack here and now to submit a brief articule on ET for me to edit and illustrate. That is, if he doesn't mind me using NQ rather than ES. I would only need about 2000 pages of draft text to make a decent 200pp book. Mike.
Pas d'Absurdites. Anyone who doesn't appreciate the parallels between trading and sex isn't getting any channels. Good trades are like my mistress. They both moan: " Oh, Mike, take me!"