The last 2 days have been tough annotating for me. Spyder, would the 15:10 to 15:50 time period yesterday be considered a traverse?If it is, a lot of questions will be answered... tia
When annotation become increasingly difficult, the reason for the difficulty often stems from the trader 'jumping fractals' during the annotation process without realizing they have done so. Yes. It would. - Spydertrader
Indeed . One of the things that made me wonder is: you have no lateral beginning with OB 14:20. Without this lateral (which even if there was one, would not be p2->p3 lateral), the 11:40 bar with increasing volume appears to become dominant and 11:45 appears to become signal for change (Peak Volume). Obviously this wasn't the case as the market had shown. My question, based on your annotations (specifically lack of annotated lateral beginning 11:20), is: " Does it mean that there's something else there (some subtle difference I am missing) which would suggest that 11:40 does not complete the sequence for green (not blue) traverse?" Thank you.
Just in case you intended to refer to two different points in time, neither area (14:20 nor 11:20) represents any sort of left to right movement (although the 11:20 area appears as if it is moving left to right). At 14:20, one thing is ending and (on the next bar) another thing begins. With respect to the 11:20 area, the market moved up, then down, and back to up as shown by the dominant, non-dominant and dominant tapes. In addition, the 11:45 bar cannot represent a signal (on the ES 5 Minute Traverse Level) for change because the market has indicated that your sequences had not reached completion. Clearly. For one, the Green Trend Lines represent a channel. Now, the channel (at the point in time to which you refer) is only forming, but the market has indicated its intentions prior to the completion of this Traverse. Second, The market has also indicated not to place a Lateral at this specific location. *** Today's chart contains loads of helpful information. I added extra annotations throughout in an effort to provide clarity. (All times Eastern and [close of] ES bars) - Spydertrader
I apologize for clumsiness and thank you for responding, I meant 1120 bar, not 1420 in my question. (typo) This indication of market intentions, was it evident: by Pace Acceleration on 1120 bar, or even earlier than that - by Pace Acceleration on 1005 bar, followed by decreasing volume on 1010 bar and another pace increase on 1015 bar [/list=A] To me it appears as if the market has finished what it started yesterday by 1035, then began building a down traverse from that point (1035) forward. And then changed it's mind and decided to build the green channel. Your placement of point 1 of the first blue traverse on 1120 OB sort of indirectly confirms that suspicion of mine but I am not entirely sure if that's how one should have viewed the market.
I'd really like to learn differentiating these type of scenarios, so forgive me for somewhat restating my original question, which you may feel you have already answered, but under a different angle. You said: You also said: and I'd like to avoid any ambiguity in my interpretation of your comments and make sure that annotating a lateral beginning 1120 containing 1125 and 1130 bars, which ends on 1135 bar (which signals change in mode in a fashion similar to 1035 increasing red IBGS bar on 8/22) - is not what the market told us to do in terms of annotation.
The 10:05 Bar shows the Market heading higher in the dominant direction as Price moves from Point One to Point Two. Again, the market proides this information in real time by the close of the 10:05 bar (even sooner for those who trade intra-bar). With respect to the 11:20 Bar, the market (once, again ) shows Price moving from Point One to Point Two - only at an accelerated rate. A trader know the market has intentions of creating an accelerated point Two, simply because, the market had already created a Point Two previously in the day. As the day first begins to unfold, one might view the market as having a bit of uncertainty. Understand, such a view results from the trader and not from signals provided by the market itself. For example, prior to the market entering sync, the trader notes how Price rests above the market's recent low, while at the same time, sitting below the market's most recent high. From such a vantage point, it appears that a trader can make the case for the market heading either from Point One to Point Two, or from Point Two to Point Three. However, the above dicotomy fails to take into account key pieces of information provided by the market. How can one know for sure (and, of course in real time) where one sits with resepct to the right side of the market? Again, the Price Volume Relationship provides the answers. The sequences, which repeat over and over again, provide, not only the manner and time for seeking signals for change, but also which side of the market is dominant or non-dominant, as well as, when the actual transitions take place with resepect to market sentiment. If you look closely at the areas which you feel the market 'changed its mind' you'll see the market had already made its intentions quite clear well in advance of the area which provided you a bit of uncertainty. HTH. - Spydertrader