I see that one has tapes in opposing directions. Can the leap be made that a traverse must be formed by two tapes that form in opposing directions? The only difference I can see is that your past chart has traverses (or whatever they are) annotated that do not have a tape in opposing direction. I thought that a tape in one direction, followed by lateral movement, then increasing volume and another tape in the same direction could form a traverse. Is this correct?
Based on this definition of a channel, here is my annotation of the 5 minute chart of UYG: I see a blue uptrending channel within a green uptrending channel into the close. So far, after hours is showing price within the blue uptrending channel. There's a bunch of other lines showing in the chart when I zoom in to the 5 minute chart (the lines from the daily annotation are carried over). I'm trying to figure out how to increase the bars (while trying to capture the bigger picture).
Interestingly, where once you could not see, now you can. Where once no differences existed, now differences exist. No. A traverse (and a channel) requires three components. Then, at your current skill set, these annotations would not represent traverses as they do not have the necessary components required for you to 'see' them as such. The description you provide has three components: Dominant, Non-dominant and another Dominant component. I bet channels work the same way, but instead of tapes as the building blocks, the traverses now play that role. - Spydertrader
I encourage you to review the Channels for Building Wealth document linked from the beginning of this Journal. I also encourage you to review the 'Flaws and Formations' Section of last year's Futures Journal (also linked from page one of this thread). Lastly, I encourage you to stick to one timeframe (daily for equities) for your annotations so your brain can become properly calibrated. - Spydertrader
I guess I was trying to see what will come next after price created what looks like a point 3 for the thick green channel.
I wish to have something clarified on this chart which Spydertrader posted: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2008336 The area labeled "Lateral Movement", is actually a lateral formation along with a FFBO (formation failed b/o). In the past, Spyder has specified that differences which exist between LM and LF and assist in seeing the sequences. Now, it appears as though no differences exist, as one is being labeled as the other. Was the labeling an error? Something else? QUIZ on BAR 6: does the answer have anything to do with the "fact" that no dominant movement, in the case of this traverse dominant movent being a tape, that no dominant movent (or tape) has yet to see decreaing volume? Sorry for wording, it's only a hazy thing in my head at the moment.