weird, it worked for me when I tested it immediately before my reply to you. ET has been having lots of problems over the weekend and I guess its still ongoing. We'll deal with it later. Thanks
With all the PV talk the past few weeks I thought maybe I was beginning to "get it". Apparently not. On the attached chart, please note the red triangles. That bar achieved IBV as an inside bar. The higher volume could not move price higher in what was then a dominant move in an up channel. As this appeared so much like the example talked about a couple weeks ago, I took this to mean a signal to reverse to short. Any one else see it this way?
What did the YM say this time compared to last time you watched the scenario unfold? How is the context different this time compared to last time? - Spydertrader
thanks, but I thought that part was clear. The three scenarios are 1) RTL BO, 2) Formation BO, and 3) a Spike bar. I am hung up why you appear to have no expectation of the sequence of retracing from pt2 to pt3 after breaking two RTL's and the MA with the widest range of the last 51 bars and greatest red volume in 38 bars. How can we ever get from pt2-3 and not violate what you said WMCN? Are you satisfied with the short channel in place that was established in the three bar Lateral? Perhaps that is what I am missing here. thanks, again
I found this to be helpful: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1316994#post1316994 the pic that was attached: http://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk20/ROMANUS42008/0018.jpg that day's chart: http://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk20/ROMANUS42008/0019.jpg
Great. You have this part clear. Now, you need more increasing Volume after these events to confirm a Trend Change has taken place. Otherwise no Trend Change exists which requires the trader to get back on the right side of the market. In other words, a trader thinks a trend change occurred, but the market has said otherwise. Why do you ignore the very thing which alters the context of this specific example - Lateral Formation BO? By simply having a different context than the one provided in this specific example. No. I don't believe the 'channel' under consideration represents a channel at all. To me the annotation for Point Two should have occurred one bar prior - making this a chubby tape. However, channel or not (how one perceives the annotations), should not matter. Price sits within a dominant uptrend. As such (depending on annotations) one either has the end of a Non-dominant Traverse, or one simply has a Lateral Formation BO. Either of which signal the trader to watch for signals of change. Such a signal develops on the very next bar. - Spydertrader
I could just cry. I've looked for Guavaman's original post/chart and it appears ET just keeps deleting all kinds of stuff. So, I'm having a most difficult time trying to recall the date/time/bar of the prior scenario so I can do the comparisons. If anyone happens to recall I'd appreciate posting it here. Otherwise, I'll just try and watch next time. Anyway, thanks so much for your help Spydertrader, I appreciate it. I just wish it had some impact on me, LOL.