log for bars 73 through 81 and the carry over status and context. the carry over is what is called in CW a "call". for us it is how we enter at the open or a few minutes before open even though we are at 94% of buying power (BP). I reviewed my three pages of my journal; it is personal so I am going to pass on making it public.
Thank you for posting a completed chart and the log pages for a full day, Mr. Hershey. This is incredibly helpful. If you'd consider posting any portions of your journal that aren't personal, I'm sure this audience would appreciate it. Iâm in agreement with xioxxio. For me, speaking about DOM and other tools are not as helpful while still trying nail down the finer points of your system. Are there things that we, as students of this system of yours, can do to accelerate our learning? Would you like to see charts, logs, etc. or are you happy to continue with us posing questions? Thanks so much for your continued posting and willingness to nudge us along in our learning.
I use Trade Navigator also and wondered if youâd be comfortable supplying some of the coding used for the automated work present on your chart? (Lats, different colored letter âUâ above price bars, 2nd bars in formations being the same color as the first bar if vol is less, etc.) Youâve spoken a lot about âcarvingâ turns and I assume that means youâre doing so during a 5-minute bar when vol has locked in. Is that a correct assumption? You also speak of the 30-minute chart for a bigger picture aspect of things. Is using a 2-minute chart going to give you too much ânoiseâ? I just donât have the feel for the market that you do, so Iâm trying to figure out how to best work this system. Iâm inferring that waiting for a 5-minute bar to close isnât going to allow for optimal performance. Am I inferring correctly?
I enjoy the input I get. I do like to concentrate on accelerating the learning process. It takes such a short while if there is a high rate of interaction. The first 1000 bars are the place where the rise up to the knee of the learning curve occurs. If a person can post 1000 bars, then we can eliminate most messiness forever. The combo of a 30 minute plus a 5 minute is the optimum. I'll attach yesterday's. I do scanning (with my eyeballs) of your charts and pick off themes of stuff yet to be learned. Working along bar by bar over a week on the first 20 bars of one chart may work for a tortise but it is better to just see a whole day as snagged one way or another. 1/3's of days are great as a set. there is space to reply using paint. It is better to have all the days in a week up to see. Then carry over can have an impact. Reversal trading is very significant as a vantagepoint. Every turn is a comendable moment as is seen on completed charts. In this SCT trading, in real time you get to watch what you annotate before the turn come into the Present ultimately. In our trading room we LOCK-IN P, then V then the EE BEFORE they occcur in the Present of real time. You can annotate before the spike of the turn. So posting charts in hindsight is terrific. They are then availoable to critique as a means of iterative refinement of learning process performance. Posting logs allows me to see E and O and suggest improvements for specific performance reasons. Pints of trading are not too important. Most on ET cannot read prints I found out. (Google Pekelo comments on my prints.)
Iâm having issues with properly defining BO, T1 and I think itâs because I donât completely understand the statements above - the two-part caveat. I attached a document with 3 examples. In each of the examples, I likely would have assigned a P2 whereas your charts indicate them as being a BO,T1. Obviously since this is your system, Iâm not understanding something. Would you please take a look and let me know where Iâm going astray? FIGURE 1: Both a P1 and T1 are in place (2 XB bars) and those 2 bars set the RTL. The next bar is an XR with higher vol than the T1. Due to the higher volume with the XR bar, I would have named it a P2 even though it did cross the RTL. Is it labeled a BO,T1 because it closed outside the RTL even though the volume was higher than T1? FIGURE 2: A P1 is set due to a PP4 having been seen in the previous bar. A BM,REV is also shown, but it appears that setting the P1 on the next bar means that the PP4 was used for assigning P1. However, the previous P1 bar is used with the next P1 bar for the RTL. I can see that the RTL is compromised, but that bar also has higher volume than the bar labeled P1 so a true T1 wouldnât be in force yet. A) How can you have a BO,T1 if a T1 isnât present yet? B) How can that be considered a BO,T1 when itâs crossing a RTL from an earlier turn? FIGURE 3: Two P1s set the RTL. The next bar is a BO of that RTL, but a T1 hadnât occurred yet. This one I may have seen because the vol would NOT have been enough to be a P2, but a T1 hadn't occurred yet... Is it about T1 breaking out after a P1 and T1 are in force or is it about T1 breaking out in general - as long as an RTL is in place? If you could help me refine my understanding of this failsafe, Iâd appreciate it. Thanks in advance!