In channels (as in waltz), the moves to Pt1 and Pt2 (step 1 and step 2) are the important ones, while the move to Pt3 (step 3) is just a regrouping or pausing move. Pt3: WMCN? Looking for Pt1 while making money. Pt1: WMCN? Looking for Pt2 while making money. Pt2: WMCN? Looking for Pt3 not making money.
Price (at close) is returning back into the channel (or bouncing off the "walls" of the container). EDIT.. This is only my observation and may not be the answer Spyder is alluding to. I am looking at bar 68, 75, 78 I would like to suggest we all start referring to bar numbers rather than time(s) - there is too much ambiguity with times given all the different charting configurations
I see it as a change because inside the bar one color of volume ceased to be dominant and the other color began, where in this particular case the transfer of dominance was accomplished through R\/R and RTL BO on increased, newly dominant red volume With a disclaimer that it is still work in progress, - all three of them are part of the lateral movement (non dominant traverse)?
Channels are constructed based on the price volume relationship. Price failing to traverse the channels can be seen and identified as an FTT.
And the FTT occurs after you have had peak volume for the channel and are therefore in Change modus for the channel. Price fails to traverse despite increasing volume. Big clue. Huge.
Price and volume follow repeating sequences as defined by the PV relationship. These sequences define trending price channels on multiple fractals. By correctly applying these principles a trader can detect continuation and change of trend to profit in any sufficiently liquid market and time frame.
As price travels from the left side of the screen to the blank space on the right side, it follows sequences that are repeated every day on any fractal. The p-v relationship plays out in these sequences. Once a trader learns the nuances of these sequences they are enalbed to anticipate continuation or change. By knowing what must come next in these sequences the trader can stay on the right side of the market. Volume levels have a direct relaionship with the ease in seeing these signals IMO
In order to better see the PV relationship play out, I invented a little exercisie. I simply went through several days charts, and bar by bar marked each bar that actually had increasing volatility when compared to prior bar along with increasing volume. Likewise for bars with diminishing volatility and declining volume. IOW- I marked the bars that the PV relationship appeared to work, and where it appeared to not work. What I found was that (very) roughly about half the time the PV relationship did NOT hold on a bar to bar basis when examined in this manner. Can anyone suggest a means for me to be able to see the relationship the way that is required? I'm prepared to do whatever work is necessary, but simply staring at the charts is not going to do it as this PV idea is very old Wyckoff stuff and I've been aware of it for years, and have consistatnly failed to see it's efficacy. I assume I must be approaching my perspective wrong.
Todd, first of all thanks for your reply on the STR/SQu thread. You know, I've been dying for this new thread, where we could fulfill to entire picture regarding OTR charts combined with STR/SQu combined with DOM. In my opinion the channels and gaussians are more like the "sentences", where as the BARS are the words. So would it be absurd to say I'd rather start learning to pronounce the letters in order to speak? In other words: starting fine going to coarse. I know this seems completely unconventional, but is that not who we are It's just that I find myself to be off topic quite a lot. After all, Todd, there is no harm creating a reversed paradigm, right? No harm in expanding the resolution of the picture, right? I hope this post will not lite "there are no shortcuts"-type posts up, because that is not at all what I (intend to) do. It would Really be neat if such a thread would exist. After all, it's one big picture. Todd, do you find this post out of touch?