Back to the topic... So what is illusionary about the below attachment. It is one of many different ways that I trade... We all watched the same day unfold. Today I decided to trade & monitor the unfold this particular way just to advance the matter of trendlines. Rather than draw the channels, I reduced it to the more conservative of the pair... Am I decieving myself with these lines? My trading log for the day would support that I wasn't being decieved... Arguably, there's a slight of hand in the representation of the bar but understandably and acceptably so since I was only monitoring and trading according to the context of the line. Red Light, Green Light. 1 tick 2 tick 3 tick...
thanks for the chart. mako. what service is that from, very clean looking! you do have a unique take on the situation, thanks for the input. nice trading today, by the way. have you read gallachers book "winner take all". if not, please do, then we will chat. hank
HMMM.... BTW! BA... I really had to think deeply about your comments here. I actually attempted to post several times but kept scrapping. I wanted to relax a couple assumptions and just focus on generality (ie. 2 bars). So really what is salient about P' is just whether it is Positive (ie. increasing) or Negative (ie. decreasing) and then being alert and being ready to act at the set {P' = 0, V'=0}. This is consistent with right line orientation and PV. Y/N? The V' stuff would be the same concept of slope but done on the volume bars. So the V' would be the Positive (ie. increasing) or Negative (ie. decreasing) trend lines demarked by the consecutive volume bars... Please, anyone clarify or correct. I am not accustomed to working without the ability to check with someone for merit, so it is possible that I may have taken an unintentional left somewhere along this path. I assure you it is definitely unintentional. Now P'', V''... Well, what I could work out was the 3x3 versus 2x2 orientation. Price on 1 axis, Volume on the second axis, thus 4 possibilities, and the null case being the boundaries between the quadrants. Superimposing a period pair you get 16 possibilities. a 2x2 PV for the base fractal and additional 2x2 PV for the sub fractal... Thus 16 possibilities. Now to how to interpret the pairing of the sub fractal motion as a consistency reflected in the base fractal motion. Assuming (and I hate to assume), P' is the right line of the base fractal, than P'' would be the P' of the sub fractal. On the base fractal P'' lines would be presumably be the equivalent P' lines of the sub fractal would thus be equivalent and/or correspond to the price action increasing or decreasing above or below P' depending on the sign of P'... Detractors, EASY! If anything, let me blab for the sake of not trying to blab as fortunately others do see.... I'll try to furthur explain. Take P'>0. This means the right trend line is increasing given the first and third points (ie. the line connecting these two points have a positive slope)... P''>0. This is the slope of the right trend line of the sub (ie. shorter period) fractal. On the base (ie. longer period) fractal, P'' is the price increasing and decreasing to the left of the right trend line (ie. traverse). So when P'>0, a P''>0 is a traverse to the left trend line and P''<0 is the traverse back to the right trend line (ie. P'). P''<0 vice versa (ie. switch the orientations)... So, in the 16 cell composition of PV (longer period) cross PV (shorter period) - a shorter period PV matrix in each quadrant of the longer period PV matrix... How would the migration work... This is certainly getting interesting... Pls, any comments from anyone especially corrections both minor and major... Secondly, what would the ratio be of longer to shorter period fractals... ???
Wrong, Mike. There were some men acquited of raping a woman because she wore suggestive clothing. You could have been one of them. Mike, you are what is wrong with this world.
I would if I could figure it out. Now I'm not sayin' I'm a savant or anything but that shit is hard. Trading I can do. I'll tell you a story. Mind you this is a true story. You don't need a 'bot you need a savant. A friend has a "kid." 32 yo savant. Can't tie his friggin' shoes. Big Mo' Fo' too like 360lbs 6' 9" or thereabouts something about a pituitary adenoma. Thing is this kid is wicked smart at things mere mortals can't even see. The kid is a geometric pattern recognition savant. Unbelievable he actually lines stuff up like stonehenge and stuff. Takes a few weeks sometimes to figure out the correlation. But the "kid" is truly rainman. Well anyways I'm thinkin' three meals a day and whatever else he wants and he'll easily figure something like the futures market out. Really not that hard. Anyways someday I'll figure chart posting out and thanks for even thinking it might be worth looking at the "patterns" I look at. Oh yeah at 360 lbs mom has to bolt the furniture and appliances down 'cause otherwise "Henry" will put the fridge on the couch and the TV on the fridge all lined up due north on the summer solstice. Truth is stranger than fiction. Too bad the kid can barely talk. Good Luck
Wolfie, you are a serious insomniac. I posted for all to see in my intermittent journal "Old Possum's Book of Practical Charts" a simple little setup that is fairly reliable, and posted execution examples. The rules are simple: 1) oil must be volatile that day, more than a dollar, and NQ must have responded inversely to it in the morning 2) the time must be mid-session 3) NQ volume must be very low, less than 5 cars per second, preferably less 4) NQ must have been in a 2 to 4 tick consolidation for at least ten minutes 5) oil must make at least a fifty cent move that NQ doesn't respond to 6) when NQ breaks out of the consolidation fast on low volume in the "wrong" direction from the oil move, hit it in the "right" direction. This is a nice little tick fuck typically good for at least 4-5 ticks, more if you can stand the little shakeout that occurs afterward before the "right" move resumes. But it is very Jackean in that there are too many rules to backtest it with any confidence. And it's a hard trade to take because it's so idiotic. I grease it with a few glasses of White Star. But in my twisted little mind there is a rationale for why the setup occurs and works. It's all in the journal. Of course trying to make sense of my drunken posts is as difficult as trying to decipher Jack's ramblings, but you've had lots of practice. Sleep well. Mikey. P.S.: What is REALLY wrong with this world is that it has been proven that there is more genetic difference between men and women than there is between humans and apes.
That makes a lot of sense to think of the matrix in terms of trendlines instead of raw price and volume. Eliminates a lot of the âjumping aroundâ. However, I would have assumed that Pâ is the rate of change of Pâ i.e. the rate of change of the slope of the right line of the slow fractal. I do not see why Pâ should be the slope of the right line of the faster fractal. I follow your reasoning but the basis of your assumption is unclear. My assumption would be that Pâ would represent how the slope of the right line of the slow fractal changes i.e. how the trend changes and how the channels blend into each other. In other words, I am not convinced that the matrix subsets are derivatives. I see them as traverses within nested channels. We are looking typically at 15min, 5 min and 2 min so the fractal ratio would be approximately 3.
Man, lol, I have to leave a comment... I read 56 pages... and the last 2 or 3. I have to say: FRACTAL, MY ASS!! One question to all quants out there: The guys on the floor, the ones that paid over $1M to be there, do you think any of them are able to use this stuff? Quagmire comes to mind... Run away... KISS is the thing. Regarding trendlines. I will say, they have value. Let me put it in context. I know two things: 1) Price will move in a trajectory till an event changes its trajectory, and 2) Noise surrounds the trajectory. You know, like billiard balls... There are ways to measure noise. I've seen charts in this thread that do. For me seeing how the noise anticipates the move is the crux. And, I'll leave it at that. Good luck to you all. Finally, I have to admit that the thread helped me get my juices going. Crazy as it sounds... So, thanks to all.