take your time. look on my chart for the colored boxes; they are internals. i do degpping mentally since Genisis has a problem keeping up with teir competition.
No thine self. I am talking my book (my story, actually). Not meaning to proselytize. Rather I would like to encourage you to know there will be a sweet spot for what works for you. Even then, there can be different strokes for different times in traders' lives. We all go through an evolution of understanding ourselves after trial and error AND eventually gravitating to what works best for us. Quite extreme opposites, (1) vs (2), but I went from (1) day trading a number of years (conservatively as described by my peers) and very much liked it until the chase began to wear on me. Also time allocated was acceptable for the gain, but eventually not for quality of life. The years of experience exposed me to alternatives through exposure with other styles of trading. The sweet spot for anyone is subjective to that person, of course. (2) I found pair trading (again, in MY very conservative style) worked for better mental health (relatively low stress coupled with agnostic to market direction) and allowed me to reclaim life, leaving the many hours every day at day trading. It also suggested I could do this fairly well enough when I am in my late 80's, considering the simplicity (especially my simple style). The trade off is less excitement but a reclaiming of that mental hygiene I referred to...more important for me than some others, I do understand. And the gains are generally not as sexy but consistently nice for the relatively little time input. On the financial cable shows, there is the incessant drone of the investing population starved for yield. I can't help but believe there is at least a modest percentage (but very large in absolute numbers) that would be attracted to conservative, pair trading with it being void of concern for market direction (Free at last....Free at last) and be happy with consistently nice yields from just a modest, active management of portfolio. It's a tragedy that part of that population is unaware. What I just described is anecdotal because it subjectively works for some traders, a minority of the active ones to be sure. Like finally finding a career you can enjoy personal passion you can attach to it, many of us traders are fortunate enough to similarly have found that match with a trading style. I hope you don't struggle at "making something work" for you. Assess yourself like you would before looking for a career. Know thine self. A sample if you like. Today's post. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3831372#post3831372
Jered,you don`t do what Jack suggests you to do.Were i you,i`d follow his instruction strictly.So,stop cutting the corners and do what`s on the table.
FrenchFry, Concerning bar 29 on the chart for 06-21. I have a discrepancy here. I show that bar to be a XR. I have a chart that was posted that also shows it to be an XR. However, I have a posted log here that shows it to be the 4th bar of a Lat3. The log also shows bar 30 to be a Lat3 bar 5. Is bar 29 a XR or bar a 4 of a Lat3? -Thanks
This is a tricky one. On Jack's reference chart it looks like bar 29 is indeed treated/defined as a XR and not as lat4. But... if you look in his log for that day... and here I'm assuming I looked at the correct one... then there is no entry for a Lat3 or 4 or anything like "retro". It all boils down to how do you degap and what the resulting formation is after you degap. If we had better charts or tools then there would be no discussion. When I degap mentally then I get this sequence: Bar 26 = XB Bar 27 = FBP (after degap) Bar 28 = Lat3 (in case I would have to do a retro then this bar would be a FTP after degap) Bar 29 = Lat4 (because after degaping all previous bars it is still in the boundaries of bar 26) However according to Jack's instructions we do a "retro" after a lat4(see instructions earlier in this thread). Then bar 29 would become a XR. Here you need to check with Jack because in the past I remember that the instruction to me was to do a "retro" only after lat7. Retro means we stop to treat all the bars which are part of the lateral as internal bars but we treat it as a sub fractal/sub sequence and we go in the log to the beginning of the lateral and treat all the bars as "normal" formations. Please ask Jack. But you see, it all boils down to how you degap the bars.