Mess du jour. It does seem that the successive r2r's from about 1:40 till 2:40 show how nicely things can flop out when the RTL's are lined up correctly. The color scheme is Spyder's with the dodger blue RTL's = 'expired' fftraverses. Do not yet see completion of the first downtraverse of the new downchannel. lj
DKM you always have the sweetest, cleanest looking charts. very nice. my obscure take, way too much flipping early trying to stay on the right side even though I was pretty sure I needed dec red and inc blk. Sure wish the uncertainty would go away and I can learn when to jump fractals. Sitting through retraces you know are traverses on some fractal sucks.
It seems that your chart is about four bars short ... Including them, the first question: is the sequence complete? (if yes: why? if no: why? what are you looking for to consider it as complete?) Then (only when the answer to the above is yes): is there a change signal? (which one(s)? what do you consider change signals?) And all these staying on your trading fractal. You definitely have to use volume too.
Indeed I clipped it BUT although I see what you might be saying, at this point in time (with the 4 bars included), I will hold with my earlier statement that it is incomplete. I always use volume, always, and as for knowing them there change signals, as best I can tell, I know what they are and have stated so elsewhere in the journal. Romanus and I tried to get people to put down what they thought the SOC's were but except for 1 or 2 others nothing was said (Spyder aside). What are your signals charts? We all know, as you have stated, that traverse change signals are meaningless unless there has been completion. I've said before that I use WGTrader's method, slightly modified, and so if I am wrong, I really don't care for two reasons. Firstly, I would have gone long on the 4:05 bar if it wasn't after RTH (that's just me). Secondly if I am wrong then one of the signals that I use for indicating lack of completion is wrong, in this context, and I've learned something new. So whatever happens is a positive outcome. What I see so often on this thread is people flogging themselves over things they can't see and figure they should be able to see at the time they couldn't and it's really demoralizing to themselves and others. So fack dat. Been there. Done that. There are other ways to get this stuff and one of them is what I described above. Pardon the nano-rant. For fun, how do you decide where to start the 'volume' line when you are looking at Vacc? lj
I thought you (or somebody else) will post some candid answers to my two rhetorical questions, and maybe start a discussion with more participants ... I got some questions back ... like the above one I can't even understand. A suggestion, if you're not doing it already: write down now what and why you're seeing at the end of today, then tomorrow after close compare that to what happened. For example: did you figure out the sequence at the end of yesterday, beginning of today?
1. Can't think of how to make it much clearer. You appear to be doing a variation on a very old theme of A/D. For any number of reasons I don't find the div particularly useful, like most of that particular variant of A/D but was nonetheless curious as to how you positioned the starting point for your downward sloping line. 2a. Been doing that for quite some time. Please see prior posts. 2b. Why wait till the close? 3a. Yep 3b. Yep How about those change signals cnms2 and maybe one of your charts too charts? lj See you in the AM.
3. You see ... I'm talking about one continuous sequence, not two different ones. I can't see it clearly on the chart you posted today. 4. ...