Let's look over the situation your chart is showing. Everyone can see that you choose to superimpose faster candlesticks over slower time frame cantndle sticks. The ratio is arbitrary and is not in a nested fractal orientation. A lot of traders feel the there is noise in markets and as well as anomalies. This kind of arbitrary display settings can be a cause of seeing noise and anomaloies that are actually not present at all. I would say about 99% of all display oriented traders create these false data corrolatiions in their routine practises as a result of poor discision making such as is shown here.
Well, at least, we have a market now defined by a few principles that can be integrated and keep a trader in the market all the time and on the correct side of the market. Here are the principles: 10 cases of adjacent bars which afford a person a consistent measure of the first derivative of the two market variables P and V. A single pattern (parallelogram) which covers the market at all times and is invariant. An interlocking arrangement of the pattern so that the patterns are nested as fractals in a specific invariant ratio of events. So many things can interfer with thee principles; usually a plethora of artificial aids overwhelm and bury the essential principles of trading. The combination of principles into an integrated powerful system is done using a deductive reasoning approach that is most common in Science and comes as an application of the Scientific Method. The market variables are integrated into a whole and measured according to the most rigorous standard. The whole is called a Hypothesis Set (Paradigm) and the precision measures are called parametric measures. Para, a prefix, is found throughout this foundation and the building blocks built upon the foundation. Because of the human nature of making money by extraction, there has to be a way to touch base when anything can be amiss. The human notification is human negative emotions: anxiety, fear and anger. When things are right on the mark and proceeding logically, then the reinforcing emotions are support, comfort and confidence. Maintaining a trading partnership with the markets comes from a loop of ingredients. The bottom line in making money is using the correct facts in the order of events of the market. Market facts are normally known as 'tells'. They arrive in the space all the time. Clearing a path for information in trading is very difficult. It becomes less and less possible as time passes during the potential learning phases. The door gradually closes bad decision after bad decision. As a potential trader begins to learn, he HAS to ACCEPT the 'tell's of the market. NOT accepting is not a possibility. 'tells' come from the market if a potential trader is watching the market. Most traders never get to see the market as we just found out. 'tells' begin the loop. opposite is ACCEPTANCE. further along and going toward the next 'tell' is a small tiny beging thing called trust. By going around the loop, trust becomes more noticable. Ultimately, a person learns the market is always correct. A myth of CW is that, if this ever happens, it takes about 10,000 hours. The altrnative path is to get it straight on how the partnership works from the very beginning. What dissappeard as this loop was traversed sufficiently to get things straight? anxiety, fear, anger. What was discovered to NOT be in the space fairly soon? Probability was NOT there. The principles and their integration brought about the mathematical basis of the system of the market and trader. Binary becomes very evident immedately. MORE than binary is the gerund nature of the parametric measures. Adjacent things are compared only. As time slips out of the picture the order of events become the milestones in lieu of time intervals.
Let's look over the situation your chart is showing. Everyone can see that you choose to superimpose faster candlesticks over slower time frame cantndle sticks. The ratio is arbitrary and is not in a nested fractal orientation. A lot of traders feel the there is noise in markets and as well as anomalies. This kind of arbitrary display settings can be a cause of seeing noise and anomaloies that are actually not present at all. I would say about 99% of all display oriented traders create these false data corrolatiions in their routine practises as a result of poor discision making such as is shown here. Jack, the question was not about superimposing something here or there.This non dominant 2-nd leg occured during RTH.And look at the volume pace of the first leg,that was outside the RTH, you could hardly discern it.Look at how the price was growing on such a low volume pace.So where was the dominant and non dominant volume?Or is it more of an art to make a difference?So in othere words you suggest to look for the Dom movement outside the RTH, somewhere else, 2-3-4, or whatever days before, or after?? You said: "THE REASONABLE CHANGE IS:Learn what Dom and Non dom defenition of the volume...." This is exactly what i`m trying to find out.What i did learn so far is that the Dom volume, (according to the cycle 1 you only trade 2 Dom trades DURING partucular session) may occur in some place that outside the RTH.Since you suggest to trade only RTH, we could wait for the Dom movement for several days.
So the deal the trader makes with the market is to learn to trade as a partner jut using the P, V charts. Al the principles are annotated using automated snippets for yellow and blue boxes and PRV shaddow boxes. Logs keep track of the unfording of forming bars and grouping bars into profit segments one after another. Annotations of the pattern on P and V keep the order of pattern events in the parallelograms straight. It took years of work to get platforms to minumum standards for annotation and having applied snippets for cases and PRV. Building three levels of interlocking fractal patterns mke is possible for any trader to go through the six levels of knowledges and kills applications. there is a huge contrast in the two trader themes of either making money or learning how markets work. As we all see over 50 years or so those who set out to make money fail and those who set out to learn how markets work find out tha making money takes care of itself. Using and ATR standard a person can make 3x to 6x the daily ATR using the obesrvable cases, PRV and patterns of the market. It is just a matter of doing the drills on an excellent platform and annotating and logging the market's continuing offer. Conservatively a beginning purposeful trader can go from 2 contracts on ES to 40 contracts in about 60 days. The intial 5K P&L goes to about 3/4 of a million dollars in this 60 days. (See Pand L on Excel). The ways to defeat yourself in learning markets and, then, making money are as follows: 1. Use a lousy unautomated platform that does not show the 10 cases nor PRV for each volume bar. 2. Do not log, thoroughly, the formation of every bar during the entire day by following PEP or one of its applications (cycle by cycle) 3. Do not annotate the three nested fractals completely. 4, do not do the daily degapping to begin each day and carry over the patterns day to day. 5. Do not jounal your negative emotions and do the drill of making a reasonable change in your approach. 6. Do not compound all of your earned profits and add approapraite contracts. 7. Do not debrief at the end of every day to acknowledge your successes and places to do more drills and complete your P and L for the day. 8. Do not measure all the possible profit segments of a day to determine the multiple of the ATR range that was offered. Do not sheck and note your dailly effectiveness and efficiency as compared to 7. 9. Do not pass your learning forward to help another learn on a regular basis. 10. Do not contribute time and money to help solve local problems.
I degapped the platform,tried to simulate 3 interlocking Fractal levels added Volume IB color.It looks a bit different, but still points out on the price to go down."3levels" and container point it out clearly. Why bother bying,Jack, if the price will go down anyway?Though,it will probably play out on the PREM, as it often happens.So why we should ecxlude PREM,Jack?It is the place where the all big plays unfold leaving the leftovers for the herd... p.s.Could anybody please suggest how to remove the drawing bars?
Isn't dominance determined by the volume? In the case of the stitches, sometimes the 2nd bar of the stitch has declining volume, it would be non-dominant. Or is a stitch always dominant?
Looking at some charts I can see this: 1. Stiches seem to always have the second bar with DECREASING volume. Shouldn't have opened my mouth... just after I changed some chart settings suddenly two exceptions jump directly to my eyes. OK... change ALWAYS to MOST OF THE TIME. 2. FTPs, FPBs and Hitches seem to have most of the time DECREASING volume in the second bar. 3. Laterals seem to be either dominant or non dominant. 4. Outside bars have dominant volume most of the time. How does this help me? Can't answer you yet, but at least I see "most of the time" which means that I can now look at those situations where the rule does not apply and see what happens instead and why. Another question... When we look at two bars and they create a "translation" then we look at both price and volume. If we have one of the other cases (i.e. sym, FTP, Stich, etc.) then we are supposed to treat the two (price) bars as one bar. In addition we are supposed to "hold", "wait". But if I look at one of the drawings above then the same thing doesn't apply to the volume bars. The two price bars are treated as one price bar with one open, high, low and close created with those bars but the two volume bars are not grouped together. Why? In fact none of the cases mention volume. Oh... another question... The cases don't have an open or close which could imply that it is not important. Looking at "translations" we have to look at the highs and lows to created the container, to determine sentiment. In "Cycle 1" the orientation is however "open-to-open" to determine sentiment. Somebody else mentioned: "First highs and lows, then open to CLOSE". Am I mixing things up again?