Thank you for asking. The brief answer is yes. In the "contest" thread I posted over ten lookup tables and flow charts. My answer is found within the substantive content of those items. Donna is remarking about patterns and their context. By creating additional degrees of freedom, the general answer is in deduced logic that establishes a pattern that is surrounded by the context. The flow sheets show the "structure" of the system. The "lookup" sheets show elements for each realm of contexts. You know you know in advance because a trend keeps narrowing in the various "bandwidths" of successive contexts. A person does bar by bar and always at all moments knows that he knows. See how nodoji directs MS's attention to the substantive facts using very light weight mental examples to tip the balance with MS. Readers follow Donna. I begin with price cases. Two give permission to measure volume. 8 cause a pause (wait) for the bar. Events happen in volume to declare the trends forward progress. All progress is continuation of a trend and making more money. In a trend, you can get to a point where FBO becomes a consideration. When it does become a consideration, you do know BEFORE it happens. The consequence of an FBO is trend continuation. All the time in the forwarding of trends, you know before any event that the event is coming. The transition from one type of trend to another is also known in advance. Because each element and event is known before the event, then it is possible to elect a more effective trading profit taking than the entry/exit CW risk and management oriented approach. Donna speaks of an assortment of patterns and contexts combos where she uses a reversal substitute for entry/exit. Some readers understand and follow her comments. The transition out of CW's entry/exit is seen in some big money operations. This is NOT the case for prop, however. MS has explained why and where. The foundation to build upon is the complete PEP algorithm. Building blocks follow. Price cases give permission to do the test procedure in the independent valiable. The OOE of the primary and secondary trend allow knowing BEFORE to happen. The context change OOE is shown by the three EE sheets AND these allow knowing BEFORE to happen. Finally, the four types of trends follow an OOE. Before an FBO is possible, two types of incomplete trend fail to materialize (the trend moves forwrd through these to the "normal" dom to non dom to dom trend. At the end of the non dom an FBO is possible. So the turn into the non dom dictates the materializing of the trend event that declares an FBO. This is the a turn. Any EE can be an a turn. So the turn into the non dom says with certainty that an FBO is in the offing. An FBO is a hold signal on the trading fractal. It form is NOT a c turn and it cannot be a b turn. The test, therefore, is the NOT c turn test presented on the 8 panels of the Modrian Table. All systems of market operation require enough precision to eliminate noise, flaws and anomalies. This is the secondary purpose of the Modrian Table. This test is the WWT test and it is performed on the Modrian Table to determine that no c turn occurred. There are two panels for each successive type of trend. The upper panel is to determine under failsafe conditions that there is no c turn. Regular EE's (35) could be found on the lower panel. In drift trends which extend beyond the normal trend configuration. There is always an even number of turns. The FBO is possible after any odd turn and is an even turn whereby a c turn has NOT happened. Therefore, it is always the case that it is known that a c turn type FBO (WWT) is known BEFORE the turn occurs. This is the most significant activity being done, when possible, in our trading room in Tucson. Most beginners learn this by their third logging drill. Any passive reader who is not doing the work to have a differentiated Long Term Memory will not be able to read the above. As Donna poiints out LTM is built in the combo of patterns and their context. As the mind becomes more differentiated, it is logical to stop using entry/exit and move to hold/reversal. Precison unerring work is required to attain the combos of patterns and their ccontext. You cannot mix up RTL's and LTL's with S and R. If you are mixing these things up, then a while later you will not be using TA in any way. And further you mind will be in an irreversable state. The mind cannot be erased.
NOdoji- on a percentage basis how much are you up year t odate 100 percent 1000 percent 10 ? All this talk is useless
Nodoji, that's very well put and clear. Though I don't know your precise method, its easy to understand what you're saying. Good communicator often equals clear thinker. Perhaps you could teach Jack Hershey how to simplify his writings, and the concept of not using abbreviations that only mean something to him? He might as well be posting in Swahili.. As for marketsurfer, its pretty clear he's a lost cause and is only here for ego purposes. There's not much point debating anything with the guy.
Maybe I'm up 1000% YTD, but I've been trading a $10K account. Maybe I'm up 10% YTD, but I'm trading a million dollar account. Maybe I'm down 99%. Maybe I don't even trade. If the talk on a thread is useless to you, unsubscribe from the thread.
Thanks for your kind words. I was unable to consistently profit from trading until I learned to be clear as a bell in being able to recognize what I was seeing, whether or not to trade on it, and why. Jack, I agree with Dev. PLEASE start a thread with a key to your abbreviations.
You're welcome, just saying what I see! Agreed. You first have to pose the right questions to yourself, frame the problem correctly, in order to discover the right answers. Which takes an awfully long time, even *with* clear thinking! As a big bonus, the same processes you need for trading - clarity of thought included - also benefits other areas of life.
Ditto. I would be very interested in going down this path but need to start with the abbreviations and acronyms. I would love to come to Tuscon some time also but that is probably just happy wishing. Nice to see you ND...been a long time since we use to hang in the chatroom!
Just to be clear, I suggested jack simplify for the benefit of everyone; but I have no interest in his trading waffle. And it is an awful lot of incomprehensible waffle. Really, it is. The man impresses himself on a daily basis with his fluffy babble, but anyone with a single brain cell sparking away can see theres something not quite right. If you go study anything said by the trading greats, none of them will blind you with complex, abbreviated bullshit like jack does. Nor will they claim to know what every little twist and turn of the market does. Worth thinking about. But obviously, were all free to see what we want. And free to take its 'full offer', if you're lost enough.