One of the topics that seem to be important to Jack is "bar overlap". I searched and found a graphic that he and Neoxx did some time ago. Based on that graphic I marked the different overlap types on a chart. If my understanding was correct then I can move on to one of those drills and maybe finish it. But before I need to find out how to teach a computer how to identify "small" and "most". And after that I have to teach myself how to "program" this into Excel. Well... many years later... zzzzZZZZzzzz.... Here are the bar/price overlap examples...
Jack,could you please consecrate into this scoring system and another better alternative?How this one pager look like, an what are those items to score? Don`t put the answer, just may be some hints Is it something nearby Bulkowski scoring patterns?Something like Bump-and-run at point 3. tnx
It's that easy!? In this case you assume that my examples were correct? I did this visually (guess-timating) so maybe what claims to be "HF" should in fact be "SM" or the other way around or even an "MO"? Let's assume what I did is correct. Do you mean by "...fold them..." something like this: 1. Translations are HF (most of the time?). 2. Syms are IB (allways?). 3. FTP and FBP are MO (most of the time?) 4. OBs make a reset (most of the time?) 5. Laterals start with SM (most of the time?) 6. Hitches are ALL (allways?) Is this what you had in mind? (in case I was right) Thanks.
I believe he wanted you to relate them to the cases as far as what they represent. Think for a moment. When you specify "always" or "most of the time" you are looking to predict how often these occur. It isn't about that at all. It's about overlap of bars. The descriptions are about how much the bars overlap each other. An OB overlaps ALL the previous bar, the others are fractions - most, half, small; and none for extreme trending. The stronger the translation the less overlap you will have, which goes hand in hand with pace. High overlap will generally be in low pace or during change. After letting that sink in regarding the 2 bar overlap cases, note how overlap changes during the increasing volume side of the gaussian vs the decreasing side. Dominant vs. non-dominant.
Yes. I'm sorry I am so far behind here. Here is an overview: Sector Rotation is the theme. All sectors have leaders and laggers. In some of the top sectors their are "growth stocks" that show stellar projections. At least 15 that show 250%/yr growth. They "cycle' as well but on a slower fractal than position trading high QA stocks that are found on the PVT Universe. The money aspect and factors. Money is being swept from other trading applications all stemming from the PEP paradigm and its HS and PM's. Roughly over time the SCT trading capacity is met and that stream is swept weeky into the PVT which grows to 12 streams and a 100,000 share per strean capaicty limit. Currently, the Universe for PVT is running in the neighborhood of 40 stocks. these are perilous times. This, about 25 million dollar limit is then swept into the SSR where unlimited capital may be applied on the slower fractal. PVT partial fills, at capacity, are about 20 going in and 30 coming out. thsi is corssover trading using partial fills. In SSR the fractal is a 4 1/2 week fractal, roughly. Events are the independnet variable as usual and NOT time. Trades can be as frequent as 4 1/2 days when trading this fractal point to poiint (vis a vis price points). as usual volume telegraphs price as a leading indicator. Sector rotation is done using 197 sectors. as expected they move before price changes. In the gap from signal to movement, you check through the sector leaders and laggers and monitor leaders to trade laggers. Agian it is like using leading indicators as signal generators for trading price moves. Partial fills take days since block size on the T&S dictates partial fill size. the best measure of sectrs is the IBD rating system Use it in an identical way as scoring uses the A/D IBD scoring. The A's are only the top two and the D's are all the others. The bias is to quality. This replaces both hedgefund investing or mutual fund investing and is done are slow trading rather than investing. The CW of the financial industry works off forms of regression , chaos and NN stuff. None of these deal with taking the market's offer. Taking the market's offer is event based as explained in Behavioral Finance. (go to web site). the concept of pre, event and post gives you a triad of signals and you use those to prep, act and confirm as you do the partial fills over the days. SSR has the same advantages as PVT and SCT in using the one pattern of the market. Luckily not many participants can find the pattern anything but "unbelievable". It is not that this approach "needs" such a great advantege but is is true that front running the HERD always a huge mathematical expectancy. again we stay out of probabilistic information theory and use non probabiltiy associated with the "order of events" that form the basis of the pattern. This make events the independent variable and NOT time. Again finite mathe prevails and everything is logic based using binary vectors. This is an example of how being in the minority which run the markets is an advantage.
four bars; all formations and oder of events are within the RTL and LTL. Dominance is defined as moving AWAY from the RTL to the LTL. The non dominance is the movement to the RTL from the LTL. FTT comes about as a FAILURE in domince to reach the LTL or exceed it. Exceeding LTL causes and acceleation of the RTL. "Internals" rifing on or through the RTL causes the FAnning (lowering of the slope of the RTL. Volatility of trends is often come from mythical volatility "estimators". At any given time the volatility is a "given " (channel width). The CW doesnot deal with the counter intuitive fact that accelerated trends are LESS volatile and stronger and fannned thends (where internlsl cause a time rate of change that is lower due to elapsed time.) a more volatile in terms of trend width. Deal asymptotically to deal with these limits. Everyone has questions. Try critical thinking in logic to answer questions. Questions are from the mind where infrence exists as items. The items are forming a differntiated chain or cloud. In the absense of inference in a space or interface, the mind poses a question for the unconscious to consider. neurons for strings with snaptic grease that is less or more permanent. as the mind excercises the neuron string form ropes and bridges are made. As these become more setablished you get "conscious" utility form these connectiions. i am an example of 53 years passing in this process. avsient secret societie that dealt with the potential of qualtiy human existance determined that the order of questions is invariant. Campbell amplified on this as he showed how all cultures have common ledgends and stories that teach grow for individuals. Philosophy is an example of the gathering of these strings and ropes of critical thinking. As a person who has followed logic to its end points in markets (down to the granularity of the markets), it tunrs out there is no noise and no anomalies. For most this is an impossible and fictional position, except that it is not. My view is to help those along the way by inciting in them the desire and ability to take the path to its natural end. I picture it as a match box filled with micro circuits and very connectable to anything like the MIT computers being given to children in very underdeveloped communities. As a little tiny tool it just makes possible anything for any family. In developed nations, why not use education to enable people to make tiny matchboxes that can deal with all the contemporary problems. I liked building mine so much. It is where Freedom comes from. Using it is sort of anticlimatic. It reminds me of the definition of a full time trader or employed person in the financial industry: This is a person who has not learned how to trade as yet.