Great starts! I won't worry about FTT yet... Focus on building tapes --> traverses --> trees... then laying the gaussians in the right places... FTT will come by themselves. I promise. Welcome to the journey!
If you could clarify 5 and 6 highlighted in red, please. Strictly for the purposes of studying the static EOD charts to learn the correct way to annotate: If I am scrolling bar by bar, for example, yesterday's static EOD chart. Prior to arriving at 14:45 [close of] bar I have drawn in some lines which I think annotate the market action. As shown in (A) portion of the attached picture, I find myself at 14:45 EST exactly, since the charts are static. And based on whatever lines I have drawn - trendlines, gaussians, etc. (I would not call them correct annotations just yet) - I arrive at hypothesis that 14:45 [close of] represents a Vocabulary Word defined as a signal for change which develops at a specific Point in Time (specific point of change at a specific point in time, where a Traverse Level trader has permission to seek change). After scrolling a few more bars I find myself in the (B) portion of the attached picture and see that What Must Come Next after 14:45 [close of], if my previous hypothesis was right, did not. Does it mean that in this specific situation (or any other similar situation, where WMCN did not) the market have already (prior to 14:45) conveyed something (some information) indicating that 14:45 [close of] can not be specific point of change at a specific point in time, where a Traverse Level trader has permission to seek change. And therefore one can go back and discover the correct way to annotate that period and find the subtle differences one may have missed the first time. Is this what the expression: "all you need is in the charts" or "the answers can be found in the charts" refers to?
Thanks, I've been in and out before. The problem with this "method" is that the further away from it you get, the more you realize the truth about it, and, well, here I am. People who know, know. Gaussians... have been an issue for me, but I think I'm getting some of the picture. Right now, when it's obvious, I get it, but when it isn't, I have troubles. I think I just had an aha, and let me ask you this... Is it a true statement to say that gaussians don't show you what IS more clearly, they show you what SHOULD be, if you understand the situation correctly? I think that was my issue... identifying them as they look, and then saying "what does that tell me?", rather than saying, "this is what i understand the situation to be, and therefore my gaussians should look like this and if they don't, well, that tells me something..." Thanks for the words and advice! TNG PS. I added an updated chart
Hey TNG.. One tip that might help w/ your gaussians. Search for Spyder's comments re: bar coloring. A bar that makes a lower low should be red, along with the corresponding volume bar. See your 11:50 bar for an example. (see how this will change what you have drawn in for the gaussian at this time--it is currently incorrect) When I switched the color scheme, it helped w/ the gaussians a bit. HTH
With respect to romanus' recent post above, Yes!! Obviously missed anotations represent a far different problem for a trader than missing signals for change or applying decision making logic onto the incorrect context. However, one cannot obtain the correct context, one cannot make the correct decision and one cannot take the correct action if one has failed to thoroughly, properly and completely annotated one's charts. Once a trader realizes an error has resulted, the first step must be to determine where the source of error resides. Does the thing in question fit the known definitions? Does the thing in question fall within the same boundaries of context as previously discussed? Then, the trader attempting to learn simply compares this same set of circumstances to other known exactly the same sets of circumstances in order to determine what subtle differences exist in the thing in question compared to others such things of known value. In this fashion, one learns to apply critical thinking skills onto a problem set in order to locate the correct solutions which fit all such cases. In other words, the answers everyone seeks reside in the charts themselves, but the key to unlocking these answers begins with one's own mind and the use of thorough, proper and complete annotation. A while ago, I suggested Peak Volume represented one area which needed differentiation (from Pace Acceleration). Another example of the same need for differentiation sits within Laterals. Yeserday's (8/19/2008) Noon Eastern Time ES [close of] Bar begain an example of one of these types of Laterals. See how many of these same things developed with today's (8-20-2008) Laterals, and note what happened next (and No, I do not mean Formation vs. Movement). HTH - Spydertrader
I believe that the lateral that formed during yesterday session at noon, was an example of a lateral that was not a retrace, not a traverse and not a channel. It had no other meaning. Phineas