After the breakout, if any, I may trade a reversal, if I like it. And that's that. As for staying out of chop, if you're getting lower highs and higher lows, you're in chop. Wait until a trend develops. If you can't wait, don't trade. --Db
But then I didn't buy that afternoon breakout. Looking back at my charts, I realized that was the first case of buying an afternoon BO like that. There were other pm BO's, but they were passed due to other pre-existing rules, and one was taken but after retracement, again for reasons of an existing rule. Anyway, if I'd had that review fresh in my mind I would've gone ahead and required retracement entry for late BOs like that (especially knowing that it didn't mean going back to revise past trades). I didn't get the reversal in RT, but by my rules it should've been taken at 1053. It didn't turn out to be much, but I think I might've held out at BE and exited maybe around 1048 just before NY close. So, +5pts woulda shoulda, -2.5pts in RT. did u guys get screwed today? I have a couple smart-ass replies to that setup, but I'll pass :eek: Why do you ask?
well the reason i asked is the day was a classical range day, especially in ES. and im wondering what kind of stuff you guys might have done to make money on a day like this.
Db, I was just wondering if the chat on the KIS room has a log. I usually leave at around 12nn est and would like to be able to peruse what was discussed after I leave. Thanks.
When I started looking at the ORB strategy, I did not get discouraged by the recent lack of successful ORBs because early on I began to incorporate ideas from my earlier work, from things Iâd learned elsewhere, and from things being discussed here. So almost from the beginning, I had various restrictions on taking ORBs that kept me out of most of the failures. Seeking simplicity, I started with a plan more like snosur4âs original approach, including an âarbitrarilyâ timed opening range. Interestingly enough, this led me in a roundabout way to dealing with the OR in a more ânaturalâ way. ORBs I will not take: (note: OR used in this case is 30 min timed version, 33min when thereâs a 10am report.) -ORB away from an unclosed regular gap of fade-able size (about 1%-1.7%). -ORB into a large gap (about 1.8% or larger) or a regular gap in a potential trend day situation (for example, gap above the high of a down day in a down swing on the daily). -ORB that occurs in coincidence with test of previous dayâs high or low (wait for retracement that demonstrates support/resistance outside the PDH/PDL). -ORB entry triggered by expansion bar(s). -ORB occurring after an incomplete or ill-defined range (any of the following: V-shaped, single swing, a grind drifting in one direction, narrow swing-less clutter, BO from sideways congestion, or BO at or near an untested opening price). Look for reversal or âORB Fadeâ, or if BO occurs, wait for retracement demonstrating S/R outside the OR. Note: any of these range restrictions might be waived to take a trade away from a large or PTD gap, or into an unclosed regular gap, when a better or earlier entry has not been available. -Late ORB, occurring in afternoon or going into lunch (wait for retracement, be ready for reversal). What Iâve ended up with is an âORB systemâ that takes very few ORBs. And while I originally defined it as an arbitrarily timed opening range (as opposed to one based on price structure), the range restrictions Iâve included are in fact a bunch of exclusionary conditions dancing around the definition of a single affirming condition: the âNâ. I still find it useful to mark off the 30/33min range though, and it seems to get me to the same place in the end (or in the N). Eventually Iâll have to deal with Nâs occurring before 30min, but that hasnât been happening in this market. The high rate of passed or failed ORBs leads to the possibility of exploiting these through reversals, or specific ORB fading tactics. I have an idea that some kinds of early ORB failure or abortive BO, while not in themselves sufficient reason to jump in expecting reversal, may be an element supporting more aggressive reversal trades that might not otherwise be taken. I have much more study to do on this though. Regarding reversals, Iâve always been weak at identifying and exploiting traditional reversal patterns per se, and the more obvious they were the more I distrusted them anyway. So Iâm working on defining/understanding reversals in more generic terms of essential chart elements like TL brk, tests, LH/HL, R/S at key levels or stair-step tests, etc. Iâm starting to see all trades in these terms. Iâm starting to think that this way of trading might be made quite systematic by breaking down price action into specific, objective actions on the chart, and specifying for example how many or which of these âelementsâ one needs to see to take a particular type of trade. For me, the ORB itself from a mechanical ârecipeâ perspective has not been the answer. But studying it has helped me to understand better how to map out the landscape each day and have a better and more timely sense of how the dayâs story is unfolding and which events are significant (and for that matter, which âeventsâ are not really events at all). Combined with basic techniques of trend identification, TL use, observation of reaction highs and lows, looking for stair-step structure, discrimination about retracements, etc, this process has me segueing from a mechanical emphasis to a more âorganicâ way of following price action that still fits within a framework of objective rules, but where those rules by themselves could never be enough for someone else to follow without having done their own work of verifying and discovering principles and making them their own. Trading ideas must be put to the test objectively and systematically (paper trading, back and forward testing). I believe this work is so essential for each trader because it is not only about verifying potential rules, but it is by doing this work that the trader gains the understanding, familiarity and confidence necessary to actually apply principles and tactics correctly, to execute them consistently, and to discover new potential tactics. Does this work need to prove statistical probabilities in a precise mathematical framework over decades of data? No, I donât think so. Especially if starting with basic timeless principles already verified over the decades. The trader just has to do what is necessary for them and what they have the resources for, and part of the task is honestly and truly coming to terms with just what is necessary for them to acquire the confidence and skills needed to succeed. In any case, it certainly needs to be methodical enough that one is seeing all possibilities objectively and not just making a collection of noticed examples that worked. In closing, let me say that⦠dig it man: I have stared into the ORB in contemplation and I saw reflected in it all that was not-ORB, but revealed with new clarity. Gazing deeper, I even had glimpses of myself. The perceptions afforded by searching into and beyond the ORB revealed/refocused/synergized essential principles for me. The work that remains is to translate these principles into the language of TLs, LRH and LRL, thrust, tests, etc, and to express them through a ritual of execution and management that is true to my best, most honest observations, and practiced with discipline, confidence and intimacy. Pass the eggs and praise the fertilizer, amen.