Maintaining a constant (and publically known) annotation convention allows others to more easily provide feedback, and allows the trader, doing the annotating, to maintain the proper focus on the correct trading fractal. More importantly, creating and maintaining a strict annotation convention creates an environment conducive to differentiation. In other words, whether adopting my convention or one of the trader's own design, maintaining an accurate convention for annotations represents a very good idea and allows the trader to iteratively refine their technique. - Spydertrader
Well it should come as no suprise that if one (me) cannot get the "M" right then how could I possibly KNOW WMCN and therefore EVER trade with certainty. I hade mentioned yesterday afternoon that I thought 10:20 was important in many ways, and that I was still looking for PT3. But seeing the market unfold as it did in the afternoon what do I do to satisfy what I think is correct as the afternoon unfolds. I place a PT2 INSIDE the previous traverse (the first traverse of the day). ARG!!!! So now here is a subtle hint to myself as I review and prepare for WMCN: [ bangs head on wall ] "WE CANNOT HAVE A PT2 INSIDE OF THE PREVIOUS TRAVERSE. " Of course, we know that faster fractal PT2's can be found inside. But NEVER the same fractal. So here is my 3rd attempt to get yesterday right because clearly my first 2 were not correct. I am anxious to see if the market agrees with my latest annotations. So PFC says to anticipate a move up for the completion of the NON-DOM 5M ES traverse and the formation of PT3 of the down channel. P.S. I need to add more differentiation to the chosen coloring scheme. I have only accounted for 3 visible traverse fractals but I see 4 on Friday.
Absolutely Not! I definitely use volume. To me, tapes breaks are a fabulous signal to watch for. For example yesterday starting with the tape break on the 11:30 bar, we had NINE consecutive bars of lower lows without a higher high (i.e. no tape breaks). It was the tape break and break of the high of the previous bar on the 12:15 bar that confirmed sentiment had changed (to me anyhow). That was my clue that this short run was over and to bank my profits. I did not trade the retrace to the larger channel RTL because I find that these can be messy. But my thinking is they should be. After all, price had just dropped 14 points and it if sentiment has changed it does not shoot right back up. (after an FTT you want to see favorable price movement towards the RTL on declining volume; you know, standard stuff...) So actually I'm employing the same principals that you are but in a more selected fashion. I just rely heavily on tapes for key signals and I try to focus on those trades that I can stay in for 4, 5 or maybe 9 bars or more! Sometimes you get a good run, sometimes not. I find that this type of trading is more risk adverse, but it does put money in the bank on a consistent basis. Here is my (uncorrected) chart from yesterday. Hope you find this (my) explanation helpful.
It took me a while to get to this, but I think this is a correct view of the dominant trends. (I remember a recent discussion when a similar thing happened, like the steep green channel on the attached chart. -- innersky
... I wonder if it's ok to have the point 3 of the down (red) channel outside its retrace traverse (blue)
If the red down channel is adjusted to the pt 1 of the pink down traverse, that would make the pt3 a FBO of the red down channel. No big deal since price returns to the red down channel on the next bar. Same outcome. So, what is the correct annotation????? Who knows..............