Yes, what you say is true about sometimes the geometry doesn’t line up when using the close to validate the BM, rev. You are pointing to a place where SCT and RDBMS are decoupled at the FF level of resolution. RDBMS tracks trend segments. Those segments can be FS or Routine, Complete or Incomplete. With that said, sometimes the visual geometry of the price pane does not line up yet the volume sequence is intact. Using the goalpost of 30-40 trades per day on the ES trading at Jack’s level makes that trades on avg of 2-4 bars. BM,revs are generally 1-2 bars, BO,T1’s 2-3 bars (mostly) and further in trend as it occurs simultaneously with other EE’s. BO,T1’s always take precedence during logging. Acceleration and fanning of the RTL is also a requirement. As one goes through the process, it’s a shortcut not to explicitly do the fan or acc as an annotation and just use the RTL at the initial start of trend - it depends on the volume and volatility presented in the day as well as the ‘pattern’ built in the mind’s eye. With acceleration, in a way one is creating an ‘offset’ of the initial b2b, r2r (which is the first trough and second peak) to the second trough and third peak of a complete trend. All this becomes clear when one takes up logging bar-by-bar as well as linking the Modrian table to the Move Reversal table through turns and ID’ing trends. The Move Reversal table works like a trail marker. When the logic is followed, the failed turn ID’s on the Modrian show up on the Move Reversal. It’s quite a sublime experience. Quite like being in doubt while off trail in the woods and coming across a trail marker that one can see on their hiking map. All of a sudden one KNOWS where they are and KNOWS that they know. One also sees how the Move Reversal table can be extended. @WchPl is psyching himself out its it relates to the first pass at ID’ing turns. Doing it the way that he was had built a necessary sports memory in terms of logical reasoning. Just because it’s now time to move on to synchronize it to the Modrian and Move Reversal tables does not invalidate the work process that he invested in. It operates in the background and some trends will synchronized with this others will not, knowing the difference is not a multiple choice test answer. It’s more like writing an essay and having a firm grasp of the material by which one can compose their own thoughts by constructing meaningful sentences into conveying an idea. In this case it’s the market conveying an idea of where it wants to go and our job of getting out of our own way so that we can listen clearly and take timely action. Jack gave a gift that just continues to give. It’s quite amazing in it’s truth and beauty.
No. The structure of the Modrian table is the proof that all FS’s are EE’s. As an EE they are one of three types of turns which combine into four types of trends. Sometimes the FS is at the FF level of turn, other times at the traverse level and yet at other times at the channel level. They are all distinct and have their own cubbies. A place for everything and everything in it’s place.
Creating a stop log helps understanding FS’s and that drawdowns (at least how conventional traders experience them) are unnecessary and a function of ‘knowing that you know’ and when you do not, exit and sidelining are appropriate actions.
PP1’s are three P1’s. Those three P1’s can present themselves in a variety of ways. I use PP1d for that sequence.
All the work you’ve done builds upon itself. Be confident and start where you can start and just start.
Starting again from scratch, and building from what I know that is true. Gonna do it 100% this time, and post everything. That's just a little first part. Firstly I try to fill the "included or excluded" annotations of each Price bar permutations, ignoring volume. So to speak, whatever volume does where am I sure that 3rd bar is inc or ex. Then i'll add volume. As you had said @Sprout , yes it takes time, and a lot, but after all i've done, what is a little bit more of " a lot of time" ? Beauty and wonderfulness comes up to my eyes each time I think, go back or do that drill. Like when I was trying to build the three levels of fractals. This is absolutely beautiful, as perfect precision is. I love and need it. @Sprout , please if any word stronger than THANK YOU exist, please, hurry up and submit it to me.... Until then, I really owe you more than a lot.
YVW, Here’s another drill that builds on what you’ve done. Go and get those pages photocopied so you can work through some logic. (or use tracing paper) Go through two copies where the BM and RTL are placed on the first bar. (Green for one, Red for the other). Fan, acc trendlines Just by evaluating form. Then with copies Notice which permutations would change this result if you also included changes in bar sentiment. Do the same if the BM and RTL are on the 2nd bar. With the above, depending on context, will create (or not) permutations where the opposing BM and RTL are placed because you’ve identified all the possible BO bars that exist in the market’s system of operation. This is your catalog of BM,rev’s and BO,T1’s. You’ll Also notice something special about the OB’s and why the close of that bar (and any bar) matters.
Before beginning to post what is going to follow, let me say I hope you guys are experiencing nice iterative refinement, orders and great life moments. I wish you the best on that journey, and in your personal life. Lastly, I just psyched myself out, and seriously. It was a real burnout on the journey. It took me farer than I could ever think, and I decided to begin again from the only absolute certitudes I had, nothing more, and started to build exclusively from it. Getting to the point where I could understand the sentence I just wrote was a very long journey in itself, and doing it once I got what it meant took me a sec… What am I absolutely sure about ? -> When Volume increases, the trend is continuing. -> When volume decreases, the trend is changing. -> The dependant variable reveals itself on the display as bars, that have a level of open, a level of close, a high, a low, and a sentiment. -> The independant variable reveals itself as columns, that have a unique level and a color. -> On two bars in a row, price describes a price case, that is unique and part of a 10 cases finite matrix. Let's go from there.
So we'll begin with this Price Case Matrix. It is, by nature, only focused on the FORM that define two price bars in a row. And the shape, the form is defined by what did Bar 2 compared to Bar 1. Focusing on shape excludes then from the analysis (for the now) any sentiment and open/close ubication from consideration. 1 = XB = the nature of that shape is that both Bar 2's high and low, and above Bar 1's 2 = XR = the nature of that shape is that both Bar 2's high and low and below Bar 1's 3 = SYM = the nature of that shape is that Bar 2's high is below Bar 1's, and Bar 2's low is above Bar 1's. So to speak, Bar 2 is included, inside Bar 1. 4 = OB = the nature of that shape is that Bar 2's high is above Bar 1's, and Bar 2's low is below Bar 1's. 5 = FTP = the nature of that shape is that Bar 2's high is the same as Bar 1's, and Bar 2's low is above Bar 1's. 6 = FBP = the nature of that shape is that Bar 2's high is below bar 1's, and Bar 2's low is the same as bar 1's. 7 = StB = the nature of that shape is that Bar 2's high is above Bar 1's, and Bar 2's low is the same as Bar 1's. 8 = StR = the nature of that shape is that Bar 2's high is the same as Bar 1's, and Bar 2's low is below Bar 1's. 9 = Hitch = the nature of that shape is that Bar 1 and Bar 2 have the same high and low. 10 = LAT = as it is composed of 3 bars, the nature of that shape is that Bar 1 has the highest high and the lowest low of the three bars and this also works if Bar 2 and/or Bar 3 have the same high and /or low as Bar 1's. In any case of the possible nuances of that case, like a SYM we can include the next 2+ bars inside the first one. A trend is defined with bars, by comparison of both highs and lows of the 2nd Bar of any price case. A trend that is long, is defined by the lows that are going upwards, whereas a trend that is short is defined by the highs that are going downwards. Therefore -> if two lows in a row are going up AND highs do not contradict this, we're in a long trend -> if two highs in a row are going dow AND lows do not contradict this, we're in a short trend -> if highs/lows contradict highs/lows position, we're either in conflict/absence of trend -> if high/lows are at the same level, we do not have trend