Illustration 3 is the gap that showed up as a consequence of lack of internal person trust as shown on an Excel (ET level) as a set of cells. Here you see the 10 to 12 leading indicators of the traded instrument. H1 and H2 refer to the hypotheisiset which is the deductive paradigm basis of PEP. If a person goes through developing internal person trust as illustrated in the DR. Hu document, then they can make use of the 10 to 12 leading indicators in a timely manner because there is no longer a mentally based incoherence gap.
Illustration 4 shows the order of sentiment shift events. It is a graphic pictograph replay of the Excel Illustration 3. So this thread has dealt with about all of the critical thinking ssues associated with learning. at the same time it well explains why most people including Wharton graduates cannot trade for shit. To trade any successful method a person has to work to build his mind. It is a process of getting neurons to align in such a way that the mind is fully differentiated. We have put on the table the work required to lay the foundation and put the building blocks in place. Work centers on drills where the mind is coherent and goes through the three stages of coherence: awereness, compassion and wisdom.
ES Monthly Chart - May 29 2010 This closes out the May 2010 bar with decreasing price and increasing volume - outside of the March 2009 retrace right trendline. Point 3 on Monthly ES chart confirmed in place. Analysis and decision to place a point 3 was done intrabar with the data set that was provided previously at the time of the last ES Monthly chart posted.
Tnx Tiki for putting up the chart. So we have got PT3 on the SF container and the TF short will look for point 2. What I don't understand is how you have drawn the pt2 of the TF (dashed dark blue) from Mar 2009 on Jan 2010. According to the chart, shouldn't pt 2 be at June 2009 when you draw the parallel ltl. emac
yes . . . This one is an error of placing it incorrectly. Thanks If you look back you will see slight adjustments from time to time as slopes had fanned or steepened. It moves so slow I zoned out .
Jack, you hit the nail on the head on this. I think this is where I am - not able to be certain at ALL times of the parallelogram and not able to ask the question to test the correctness of the parallelogram many times during annotation and logging. You have mentioned on the correct vocabulary for columns of the log and part sof the parallelogram. Would you care to elaborate and provide a picture to illustrate on the vocab for the log columns. For that of the parallelogram, I would believe them to be the cases , Pt 1, 2 , 3, FTT, VE and perhaps BO (FBO) ? Thanks again for your untiring effort to allow us to learn .
This is my view of todays chart after review and correcting some mistakes. On hindsight, it is clear after RTH but during the day, questions were many due to uncertainties. I think putting in the right logging would clear alot of things up during charting time.
If the SF is drawn as such, that would mean my earlier PT 1, 2 and 3 is incorrect since the SF PT1 cannot be the PT2 of the previous channel, right ? Hence, the Pt 2 of the long fractal would still be on bar 5 9:55 AM before the VE ?