Dear Sprout Thank you very very much for your answers, your patience and your own work sharing. I truely appreciate that and you're a fundamental help to me. I hope what you're in now doesn't hurt you cerebrally too much. Take care of you haaha With that said, here comes my understandings from your last comments. I post what I've done. Just one thing important : after I finished what follows, I reread your comments and found out I made some mistakes some and elsewhere. No big deal, i will corrify them, and I realized that at rereading those comments in green and when I started with cases beginning by XR (PC number 2). I will rectify this, and post later my sequence of 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 (those beginning or ending with 10 will be explored later), rectified from what follows. Just to see the base I made, never mind I made errors. Anyway, fear of error is fear of truth.
Dear @Sprout , after reading many times your last comments tu clarify things, I have been through the second part of the PC's matrix. The sequence beginning by case 2, so XR. Here are the first three cases then 21, 22, and 23. I have some issues at ID correctly what you said. I must use deduction all the time, but it's like the more I read your comments to understand, the more I see it fuzzy. Maybe I need one or two complete days of break ?I don't know, cause lastly things were going nicely. But it's all right, no big deal. I will later take the time to quote your comments and unicate to you the "zones" where I feel unsure cause I see things not clearly defined. I know there is to use fuzzy logic at times, but when fuzzyness is really too fuzzy, there is no logic possible anymore. I post the three cases I made of the sequence beginning by XR. With that said, let me tell you my current work is a fantastic one, I mean it's fantastic to work on this. I feel, inspite of all I said above, comfortable with it, cause I see it as a finite way of a huge universe of complex possibilities. I love that. And there is so much beauty in this, that sometimes I makes me want to almost cry a bit. Yes I said that, and I assume it totally, as it is really beautiful. More work, observations and questions coming soon. Meanwhile, take highly care of you and I wish you the best experience in crypto sphere
Things may be clearing up by themselves as I continue through my 100's PC Matrix. Here is the last part of the sequence beginning by 21, until 29. Later in the day or tomorrow, I will post clearly the questions that remain and cause my troubles. I will do so by quoting from your last comments @Sprout and support it by illustrated examples. 'Til then, take care of you
I don't think they were under any obligation to do what you asked. And a word about Jack's legacy, I took a small part of Jack idea the part that I think I understand and created an indicator called JH-buy-sell-volume-ratio. Soon after a vendor offers a brand new volume indicator never seen before but looks just like my indicator, color, hash mark and all. There is no mention of Jack anywhere in their sale talk, legacy is overrated in internet age. The pic showed their indicator costs $275
OMG, guys! Page after page after page... Profitable trading is so much easier than all this nonsense. I know everybody has to find their own way but jeez. The legacy of JH may very well be...insanity. Good luck and good trading
Yea, the JH material is public domain for those willing to make the wicked trek. JH wanted those who harnessed the power to use it to help solve LOCAL problems. Commercial rebranding and profiting is not that. IMO, that is Jacks legacy. That, and the fact the stuff works!
Here is the first third of the Master Copy Matrix. I stopped it at sequence 3. and so, cause I saw new things appeared. First of all, and that's all the matter, in fact, I noticed that from the beginning, I arbitrary affected sentiments to the first two price bars, got the form of it, and then added the 3rd bar, to continue the drill you told me about @Sprout . When I began the sequence 3. so by 31 case I said to myself : "well, the third bar is either gonna form a LAT form, or a kind of "long BO". Then inside the LAT form and the BO form, the trend can either FAN or ACC, and in FAN case, the close of the third bar depending on its sent, can either be under prior RTL/ between RTL and 1st bar's high/ above 1st bar high.". From there, some cases appeared as seen on the image. And from there, surged in my mind : "but what about the sent and then the open and close of bars 1 and 2 ?". Then I drew this : That is an example of a continous short sentiment on a continous long form (XB). If we consider one little square on my sheet as the most little tick the bar can vary of, the we can see that bar 1 is 6 ticks in volatility, and so are the next 4. And then let's fix each bar will have 1 tick between its Open and Close. Then if we want to see a continous short sentiment along the next bars while conserving an XB form, then the number of bars on which we'll be able to observe that is determined by...the number of ticks between bar 1's high and the low of the bar where this context will become impossible on. The bar where it becomes impossible to continue to see short sent on XBs, is the third bar after the first one. That's because there were 3 ticks in volatility between bar 1 and bar 4. After bar 3, it's impossible to see short sent and XB on the third bar, only a DOJI or then we will either have StB/OB formed by bar3+bar4. So, the repetition of XB with short sent is broken. Why did I do that, and what does it help me for ? -> From there, some cases appeared as seen on the image. And from there, surged in my mind : "but what about the sent and then the open and close of bars 1 and 2 ?". It turns out that in function of, in my matrix, which sent was affected to the first two bars and where both Open/Close were affected on each bar, the third bar sees its "possible surge in form and nuances in ubication of O/C compared to prior RTL" considerably reduced or even sometimes cancelled. So, @Sprout , the question is : do you think, as I do a bit now, that I should begin again my matrix affecting all the sentiment permutations to not only the 3rd bar, but also to the first two ones ? It would be then (L for long, S for short) that for any price case combo : LLL/ LLS/LSL/LSS/SSS/SSL/SLS/SLL. I understand the matter of that drill is to establish the possible ubications of O/C of the third bar compared to the prior RTL. But once this is established, there are also nuances that can appear. And this fact, came into my perception with the "continous short sent on a continous long form". As I was on the 31 case, I was establishing the possible forms it could have. The result is that it can either create a Lat, or a "long BO". Once this established, this following example made what I said previously as for O/C and sents of the first two bars jump at me : That is not an exhaustive comment, but on the first case of the page (so long sent on 3rd bar with close below the two prior RTLs) we can clearly see that the whole sent of the three bars is long. And by looking a bit closer and precisely, we can see it by noticing ....that the open of bar 1 is below bar 3's close. Meanwhile, the form clearly shows a short trend. This is what led me to the "continous short sent on a continous long form". So what came to my mind is that, the open and close of bar 1 and 2 matter as much as the third bar's. So, to reformulate my question : am I seeing to far beyond where I am at the moment ? To synthetize, when form says something and the sentiment contradicts it, the context will make us decide if either the form/the sent takes precedence....and this reminds me your last comments By the way, here are the quoting I wanted to use to ubicate the infos of your last post, that I see fuzzy the most. congruent with the form -> which form are you precisely talking about ? the most actual, so XR or the prior one so XB ? As I see things, logically the congruent sentiment with an XB form is Long, and the congruent sent with an XR form is short; but this is maybe where I start bad. We're in the 13 = XB/SYM case. When I said there there can be "ACC", as always from the beginning on the stuff I'm currently doing, I was talking about the form, the vector, the degree of inclination of the trendline. I don't get how volume can validate or invalidate the fact that a trendline made up by two highs/lows of 2 price bars is more or less sloped ? I may be missing what you say. Can you clarify please ? Several months ago you told me "you're a bit of perfectionnist". You were right. When you sey here " if the sentiment XO a [...] RTL". Are you talking a bout one of the legs of the bar ? or the close ? I mean, the sent is, for me, the nature of the gap between O/C, so either the unique leg of the bar, or leg 2. Once again, could you clarify please with a bit more of precision as for the term ? NB : I also noticed, beyond and in addition to the ubication of O/C of bars 1 and 2 in my master copy matrix of 3 bars in a row, that the number of legs also counts and says a LOT. It makes some "next steps" possible or not in function of how it began. As always, future precedes the present and the past. It took me a nice while to realize I had not understood what you meant here. Sometimes, I feel stupid... I get you now, and am currently building that master copy that I'll photocop. Hope you're doing well, wish you the best Aha's in your new sphere
The way I see it: Volume is faster information than bar sentiment is faster information than form sentiment is faster information than trend segment is faster information than tapes/traverses/channels/gorillas, whatever name you want. Could it help you to study what path price "must"'ve taken, in order to discover OOE at more and more granularity? After close, bar sentiment and failsafes settles.