Judgement is a funny thing. thanks for the laugh. The qwip I liked was about channels. So absurd. It was a good one. This guy is making a fraction of the ATR (who isn't?) and he sees that a channel which makes a multiple of the ATR is less than a good edge like he has. I wonder if he can easily recognize a rabbit that has been turned insideout?
sheet 6 was very important. We added 50% to a channel by looking at "Next" which is a bar in the future. We made up a test that would tell us about making money. we determined we could always be making money by doing page 6 for every bar that is next. But...... By knowing WMCN exhaustively (as we now do). What else is there to do? If a WWT comes along it just means we have skipped ahead a little. On this simple level it does not matter. If we skip ahead on continuation we still have continuation. If we skip ahead on change we get two changes and that equals continuation. So all is well on the simple levels worst cases. forging ahead we can go through stretching out trends by adding in the other cases of price. They cause "waits" and after a wait the test is possible. Squish waits first and measure. Then do any future cases that are not "waits" just when they occur all relative to the prior bar real or squished as the case may be. This is what takes 20 to 40 days to gain fluency and facility. I am glad to put up my work since I do it everyday for RTH's. I color the cases as hilighting. Actually, I supervise it being done since I just do trading and make sure I know I know in advance all the time. We can also wrap up loose ends. there are two kinds only: VE's and fannings. VE's are acceleration of channels. Add a new RTL first. then move the channel points forward. The exisitng point 3 becomes a new point 1. The VE becomes the new point 2. To get a new point 3 use the next bar when it arrives. Point three becomes CETAIN as the new bar forms. All you know is that you have CONTINUATION DURING THIS TIME. A BOOKMARK IS EXTENDING FROM THE NEW POINT 1 TO HANDLE THE FAILSAFE NATURE OF TRADING. If at anytime an internal appears as a formation sitting on an RTL, then fan the RTL to place the internal within the channel. before the weekend, I started to deal with other channel nuances on the 30 minute charts. Grab them and add a list of the call outs that cover the degapping ETC. very fortnately we had a lateral that nade it through a degapping. you can see EVERY time and offsetting degapping leg was used to handle multiday RTL's. make this page 7 and write in the above stuff on page 8. The last page is next (page 9). Across the top of the page write FTT's.
Page 9 FTT's. the interlocking nature of fractals allow channels to be drawn on slower and slower fractals. they get easier and cleaner as the slower and longer they get. On successively slower fratcal channels an FTT becomes a point on a geomatric drawing of a channel. this ithe only rule. Looking toward faster fractals. Stacks of FTT's occur at any slower fractal FTT. we cheated at the beginning of this channel discussion. we started with one bar and defined and named its parts. The volume single bar information is very complex we could have found out. The FTT on the trading fractal is shown on the 5 minute time frame. Every EE is an FTT on price and the FTT's are called turns. The turns have ID's as well: a, b and c. Each possibility is included as designated by dominance. (D or ND). The independent variable is named bar by bar and the OOE leads to the thirty five differentiable endings (EE's.) As the bands are used to help define the differentiability, the four types of trends formed as channels also come into view. I deduced (over many months) the relationships of the c turns. The C trun is a slower fractal FTT where the dominance shifts from long to short or vice a versa. The results are in one table, the Modrian table. All of this is printed on sheets for convenient reference. There are OOE's for all interwoven concerns. QED.
I don't know. There is a spectrum of alternatives for any potential trader. A lot of people operate on the 5 minute chart time frame. From this I gather there is a human capability to partner with the market on some basis. In contrast, those whom you speak of are probably gamblers who cannot fathom gambling. For any dialog to proceed there has to be limits on how broadly the conversation can be spread. For me I feel that assigning names to bars in a bar by bar sequence that defines the channel independent variable elements is about as good as it gets. By assuming the third price move is the terminal channel price move using a further sub fractal usually lets an End Effect occur. Then everything is a reassembly of slower events. Making money at this level really jacks up the daily take in terms of the ATR. What lessens the take is passing on profit segments when there is insufficient liquidity in the independent variable. I know cascading is likely in VDU and DU or even low volume but generally all of this is availalbe to see (that it can't happen by using the methods of olden times (the tape reading days and rules)). In those times the federal government did not have to generate income with taxes.
For those to whom you are refering to a 5th graders,you,probably, can`t get better then the alternative you suggest.Knowing the interaction of the market variables from the begining is great.But there is a spectrum of different kind of traders-age-related,style-related,different mentally,etc, as well. p.s. i got some values from your posts regarding the price cases - tape,and regarding the trend types.your volume counting techinc is a mind-boggler fro me.
I`ll add.While you have, more or less,the more,more likely, a clear certain picture consulting the price cases.For me,it`s never clear with the current volume bar,while it`s more clearer with the previous volume bars,the current,developing volume bar is never the clear.And it`s never clear for me because of the doji.The great pretender Doji is the worst culprit in volume analysis.How many times did i see the current developing volume bar,shifting direction from buying to selling(for e.g.) volume at the very last few seconds.It`s not fair and incorrect.So,let`s eliminate Doji!
I have good news for you. In five to ten short years the display of the markets will be totally diffrent and much more easily handled. I admit at present it is not possible to get vendors to think about making tons more money selling a sophisitcated canned srevice. tey still think being "good enough" will work forever. Read Greenspan. I do not know how he got in the mood but he did get it straight that what he used as a basis was a vapid slimy mistake. I feel a shift coming. Rationality and simplicity is not to bad a place to reside. My orientation is to go it alone and let my present seep into the future. My vendor did make concessions to John Bollinger and us. The vendor is not being harmed he found out. BUT ....
Technology sucks.It`s not even 'good enough',it`s ugly.Any substitute for the 'volume in dojiness',that you may suggest?
I appreciate your series of posts in this thread on Saturday. Iâm only beginning my close review of comparing what youâve written here with my current implementation and Iâve have already found a couple of areas for refinement. I have a couple of questions I would like to ask you about retrace/reversal differentiation. At what point, exactly, are the two categories of non-dom movement differentiable (for those of use who use an âold schoolâ iteration of the methodology)? Iâve attached a chart snip-it from this morning below and would like to highlight one particular trade. I went short on bar 20 at 98.00 (bar with a pink triangle just above it). My context: we are beyond point 3 of the channel, weâve already had a flaw/formation, we see decreasing volatility on increasing volume, and price is coming back down towards the opening price of the bar. Price is struggling to improve on increasing volume--time to be short. At what point could someone have differentiated between a retrace and reversal for the move following bar 20? (I could not until bar 25). As I wrote in this thread earlier, my definition of a retrace is price movement towards the right trend line on decreasing volume. Depending on the context, I may anticipate (in real time at the start of the movement towards the right trend line) that a retrace will become a reversal (e.g. if I think an FTT just occurred--like I did on bar 20 in the attached chart), but until the right trend line is broken on increasing volume we only have a retrace (by my definition). A move towards the right trend line that fails to break out, by my definition, is just a retrace. What do you find wrong with my definition of retrace? Does this apply only to those using the RDBMS methodology or do you suggest, in general, even for us "old schoolers", to assume the third price move is the terminal channel price move? -river