Please see the snippet. I annotated a lateral beginning with the 11:40 bar which was killed with the 11:55 and 12:00 bars on increasing volume. The 12:05 bar is the change bar which does not qualify as a peak volume bar because of the falling rate of change of pace. Thus the change here is due to a dominance change occasioned by a 4 bar pennant BO-FBO, beginning with the 11:50 bar and ending with the 12:05 bar. A 12:05/10 symP is followed with another symP which with the next bar produces a pennant FBO change pattern but this is not valid since there is no confirmed P3 up. As I said previously, annotation without the 10:55 lateral generates gibberish. Sorry for the late post. See you in the AM. lj
Spyder, My confusion in yesterday's market action at 10:10 and 10:15 is the result of my belief that we had a Pt3 at 10:05 and confirmed a Pt3 at 10:10. I believed we had a Pt1 at the 9:45 OB and Pt3 at 10:05 (which was a volume trough). Because I thought the traverse was forming its end effects and not price moving from a Pt2 to Pt3, I misread the market.
The Price close of the 10:15 bar disqualifies it as an Acceleration of Pace and the Price close of the 10:50 bar disqualifies this bar as Peak Volume. I think my new approach is to pull a George Costanza. Whatever I believe I know or think the correct action is, just do the opposite.
No kidding. Love the volume moving average, you mentioned it so much, I am surprised everyone is not using it.
Hmmm. Although Spyder didn't actually mention my effort, I'll assume that he was referring to it. I'll make the further assumption that said effort was not what he constructed when he responded to what the market was telling him. So let's see what today brings forth. lj