mikeytrader has harressed me for months on end about using 'The Box' for annotating . He claimed doing so required fewer clicks. I finally crumbled under mikeytrader's relentless pressure, and for the first time, used a different tool for today's annotations. You know what? It was easier - fewer clicks required. No other meaning intended or implied. - Spydertrader
Then I encourage you to find a dfferent meaning (specifically, the exact intent of the author) to the words circled - other than, your current viewpont. If for no other reason, than Jack authored both documents referenced (the one you circled and the example referenced by Polford). Since you appear to see conflict in the two documents, find a definition which brings clarity to both sets of instructions and does not create an environment where they are mutually exclusive. Welcome to your first lesson on critical thinking. - Spydertrader
Spyder, in the situation I have attached. How do you know in real time or even in hindsight for that matter that the traverse isn't the Bold peach channel I have added to your 7-15 chart. Ive been staring at charts for days now and I feel like a zombie. My thinking is the bar broke the olive green tape that is circled a pt 3 came in which is drawn in black and increased black volume followed in the Guassians. Obviously this is incorrect because the light green channel that you have is the correct traverse. But what is a ruleset I should pinpoint to make sure my annotations are correct here?
Glad I could be helpful. To be honest I still have to let the cases on the posted picture and their implications sink in. This should mean, I can not answer your question,because it could lead you astray. I think the picture contains some errors and I was expecting, that someone more experienced would point them out.
there was no bold preach channel, your RTL didn't connect to end of the second bar. If it is it will look like the skinny green line already there.
Nice first try. This is not a comprehensive list. i.e. if you haven't worked out all the detail, you are likely to run into the same question again. Do one thing at a time: focus on tapes first. Here are some combinations you can work toward: 1. =H, =L (=equal) 2. =L, HH 3. HH, HL 4. =H, HL then add the variations of: 1. 1st bar wider than 2nd bar 2. 2nd bar wider than 1st bar then extend the variation... 1. 1st bar a lot wider than 2nd bar 2. 2nd bar a lot wider than 1st bar ...etc., I have not listed all the possible combinations of 2 bars yet. Use your imagination and observation to push the list to the limit, so that you will never be surprised again. ... do the same for down tape. p.s. don't let gucci take all the glory!
Spyder, thank you - your charts are very helpful and I appreciate how much work goes into the annotation and posting for our benefit. Would you consider changing the color of the blue box to that of the chart background thereby eliminating the extra (particularly the vertical) lines which are the same line weight as the price bars. Assuming the yellow shading is automatic with the box, wouldn't this allow the yellow shading of the formation area to remain visible as a highlight? Just an idea to reduce clutter and make the chart easier to obtain all of the information you have meticulously included.