Sorry, not sure if I understand what you are referring to. Are you asking me to compare the bo bar at 11:15 on the 18 July with 11:45 today?
1. Delete the Green and Purple. They are not Traverses. They only look like Traverses. Note how the increasing Volume forms. 2. Match the gaussians to the Trend Lines. 3. Think of Laterals as needing two closes Outside them to 'kill' the formation (end it). - Spydertrader
My post describes a lesson that you (and many others) need to learn - how to differentiate between what you 'see' as similar or exactly the same, and the reality of 'subtle differences' which alert the trader to a difference in context. You posted two snippets of charts today. In one, you failed to 'see' a Lateral. Compare the chart snippet (posted today with the lateral) with the lateral BO, to 11:45 AM [close of] ES bar (all times Eastern) in order to understand why today acted differently than what you stated 'looked familiar.' In such a fashion, you should eventually arrive at the reasons why the market said hold earlier today and reverse on the earlier posted chart snippet. I don't want guesses either, so if you cannot see the differences right away, work at it for longer than 20 minutes. - Spydertrader
Note the Four Black Volume Peaks. Locate the one which has a signal for change. After a signal for change of an up Traverse, what must come next? - Spydertrader
If I may chime in, this should be the second Black Volume Peak. It ends the first up Traverse (not annotated) and starts the second non dominant Traverse.
LOL. I was studying the chart for that day on and off quite a few times trying to find the subtle differences that would suggest why a lateral movement should not be annotated there. Thank you for the lesson in independent thinking.
I am not guessing. A clear difference exists in terms of VE in one and lack thereof in the other. EDIT: I forgot to mention the lack of pt3 either