Iterative Refinement

Thanks again for your post Tums. Based on my interpretation of your annotation I have a couple of questions.

There are 11 laterals, 9 Movements and 2 Formations. 7 of the 11 begin on the second bar of the ‘kill pair’ (kp). Of the 4 which begin on a third bar (one bar past the kp or at the start of the day), 2 (laterals 8 and 10) follow a symP and 1 (lateral 1) follows a FBP (this is the first lateral of the day and did not follow a kp). The fourth does not follow a pennant but rather is the first bar after a kp, both of which bars show a volume > any bar in the movement prior to termination. There is also a case (lateral 6) where a symP kp is followed by a third bar which forms an FBP. In this case you selected the second bar of the kp as the starting point for the next lateral.

Is it correct to say that if the second bar of a kp forms a pennant with the first bar of the kp, then wait till the third bar before annotating further? If the third bar forms an ‘extended pennant’ then choose the second bar of the kp as the starting point for a possible lateral?
Lateral 11 shows both of the kp with volumes > any bar within the LM prior to the kill. Does the second bar have to be > first bar of the kp and all bars within the LM, to require selection of the third as a starting point or is it that just one of the pair has to be > than all others within the LM?

With respect to lateral 11, other scenarios are possible but I will hold off pending your reply. Any thoughts or questions are as always to be seen in the context of a working hypothesis. I do appreciate that effort has been expended by you and others to get to this point in the iteration and I have no tacit expectations that you will respond to my questions. As someone who errs with incredible frequency, I would only ask that if you erred, then you say so.

TIA

lj

 

Thanks for posting the daily charts, Tiki, nice work.

(and btw, I'd add a down chubby tape for the last three bars... might break tomorrow but who knows)

 

My chart for today. Blue arrows have no meaning other than I was using them to keep my mind busy and as a guage of price slope and duration.

The gaussian were a bit clearer to me when I view the 1300 to
1530 time frame as a big lateral movement. Lateral Times above are approximate but are shown accurately on my chart.

 

Point 3 of above is something I don't see. I don't see that traverse leading to a lateral. I do see 14:25, 14:30, 14:35 closing inside the previous bar (making lower lows) and then the next bar is a FTT (JW, higher volume half the range) saying expect change which materializes on the next bar (incr black).

I see a FTT that didn't work out. (did not lead to a point 3 up)

regards,
Ivo

 

Those are NOT qualified annotations.
I merely want to illustrate how the market can congregate in "Laterals".

any exploration beyond this is a rabbit hole.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1985726#post1985726

 

Exactly how I see it. I feel this system is being over-engineered and every event has to be explained in some way. (always afterwards). WTF's simply do happen; it's the people who trade.

You trade point 1's or point 3's or both. Did you take point 1 (the FTT) then you would have got out BE or with a small profit, did you wait for point 3 (up) then you wouldn't have taken the trade at all as there never was a point 3. Keep it simple; profit is all that matters.

Just my opinion after 20 months of looking at charts and annotating. Always ready to acquire new insights though.

regards,
Ivo

 

Thank you Tums. And indeed the old adage, IBOT/ITOBXFTT/FBO remains quite true.

lj

 

See attached. Traverse, Lat, Traverse.

 

IMO, outstanding annotation dkm. Spot freakin' on.

lj

 

Thanks David. I see it now. However I don't see the value of it. You can draw two different channels (two 1-2-3's) or one larger one (one 1-2-3). It's all broken by increasing black and we don't want that when being short do we?

Ivo