Compare what Tony didn't say with what spy suggested to you. Then go back to Tony and see if Tony confirms what Spy suggested about quality trading universes. See if there is any agreement among yourself Tony and WJO on the value of only trading quality stocks where quality is determined by repeatability (the stock does the same P, V pattern over and over) and high beta, high EPS (the percentile) and high RS (the percentile). What happens when you are position trading quality stocks in long term periods of groth? You are simply trading the riser portion of a long flight of stairs. Owners and potential buyers come to a total disagreement on price periodically (DU) and right after that on the trend line there is a BO that traverses to the left channel line on increasing volume. The left channel line is the channel annotation that is used for exiting; the right channel line, conversely is used for entering.) If you want to know when the last traverse is on the long term channel read up on "climax runs". Why not chose a universe that only has a stock distribution like this. None of these stocks "float at equilibrium on a steady level of volume" as do the stocks you are presently chosing as the best application of your capital because volume doesn't work for your holdings.
Time saver: If you want to know when the last traverse is on the long term channel read up on "climax runs". Climax runs occur on long term trends at the end of the trend. Price breaks out of the LEFT channel line and goes to a peak on extreme peaking volume. The price swing is measured and it is usually 15% of the beginning price of the movement. BO's on left channel lines are rare and if and when they happen for just small amounts it is best to just widen the left side of the channel as an adjust ment in the new increased volatility of the stock, This occurance is common when a stock becomes "popular' in the various media. You arduous effort to prove that volume might not work to get to the conclusions of others that they have proven to themselves is a tough undertaking, logically speaking. Failing to get it done is not a thing to worry about. It wasn't going to be possible anyway. now that you have that over with, it is time to look at the other side of the coin. Here, you will have a great success in completing the proof. Check your proof against 5 or 10 othrs as a way to see the range of sophistication that is available. After that , the pragmatic job of making use of volume at every opportunity to make higher money velocities will be at hand for you and a lot of ET'ers who will follow your lead.
Why Babak... Somewhere way back I posted something that was deamed "confusing". My clarifications would largely be OT for the time being. When appropriate, I will consider clarifying. I know this may come across as vague so I won't comment further about that particular point of confusion. I have had a most memorable pleasure of meeting Grob in person at his alma mater. He is a few sigmas above the norm as far as knowledge, skills, and experience are concerned. It's the stuff MVP's are actually made of, no one is born an MVP. There is an exponential difference between "high velocity" money making and ordinary money making. As you are finding out, volume is involved. What are your experiences with the use of volume? What are your skills using appropriate volume tools? What is your knowledge regarding volume? This thread is certainly continuing to be more and more interesting. I spell checked this post for the usual critics.
This is the very center of Gann. There is nothing new under the sun. Having said that, Jack is very valuable in that the stilted langauge that he uses makes one reach for the concepts that he espouses, which are very valuable. The P/V relationship is just one of several ways to make order out of chaos, as Spyder alluded to when he suggested ignoring the stocks that don't fit the P/V pattern. Gann said the same thing in his courses. Volume is not an indispensible indicator. One could easily formulate an algorhythm based on price alone and trade that. As long as s/he is consistent, then all is well. Volume really is a minor variable folks, it is relative in it's contruct, therefore it is relative in it's application. Only price is absolute. Best Regards Oddi
Don't you mean 'deemed'? Jack is an uber-intelligent, MVP, high velocity trading God with 50 years experience. Which sort of explains why he flies a Grob109 not a Learjet45XR, writes in gibberish not clear, concise English; doesn't ever post a trade or any specifics, and doesn't know when he's being had. I'll just leave this as another e-flare on ET for whoever happens to be looking at Jack's stuff in the future and wondering.
Some have pm'ed me wondering about this book I mention. I got the title wrong, its "How to take money from Wall Street" by Tony Oz
You might also then want to include the rave reviews he received from the individuals attending the IBD Tucson meeting. Jack spoke at great length during the meeting I understand. Those in attendance found him to be clear, concise, and to the point posting their comments which were subsequently reposted by Nkhoi in my Journal. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=817012#post817012 - Spydertrader
I have this picture in my mind of tall distilnguished guy, lean, tanned with a pony tail, so hes probably short, fat and bald, right?
Jack-Grob is certainly a funny old bird. He has yet to show that trading with volume information is useful on longer time frames. After years of backtesting, many thousands of real trades, and yet more backtesting, I believe I could prove it is not necessary, but I'll just leave it up to Mr High Velocity... I wonder how much "high velocity money" translates to real, yearly percentage gains? Alas, we shall never know. Regards to all. C
Grob, One of my favorite songs is ----------- "Pollaroid Millenium" by Superior from "The Saint" soundtrack ---- listen to track #11 --- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...bs_b_2_1/104-8679189-1895941?v=glance&s=music http://endor.freeservers.com/songs/polaroid.htm i guess the pictures/negatives analogy may just work for me --- hahahaha! good one!