My understanding goes like this... So yes, DV is necessary for pt3, and DV is necessary for RTL BO ending as B2B. Points and volume apply as is to R2R 2B 2R gaussian as well.
As I see it; B2B... = R2R... : T-IV-P-T... = P>dv>T<iv<P>dv... 2 = xo of RTL B (xo of RTL) B... = R (xo of RTL) R... 2nd B, 2nd R, volume peaks correspond with price outside of prior RTL, Fan from prior pov, accelerate from new pov, (DV)-IV-DV = (B2)B2... or (R2)R2... All of the above is true. Depends on what one includes/excludes as point of reference.
So when a trend ends in DV or T FTT bar, gaussians dont recognize that price extreme as new pt1? Maybe P on different tf, but then you need to be searching for it and already know it should be there. A new extreme wouldnt always be pt3 or xo rtl. What Im saying to understand drill 4, maybe consider the sequence: t < iv < p > dv/t, in real market data? Though this model seems more rdbms than gaussian, if gaussians follow the pattern so closely. Rdbms sequence: p1(ass.) t1 p2 t2p t2f = end nearing and: p1p1 t1 t1 p2 p2 t2p t2p Here p1p1 become P. Assigned P1 could be IV or T.
What supported me in differentiation was understanding the history and progression of the various systems Jack shared. So fortunately for me I started at the beginning with PVT. I figured out how to program it and made good money with it and then put it on hold when Yahoo broke their api. It was good timing in that it served as ‘proof of concept’ to go ‘all in’ on Jack’s teachings. Gaussians can be perplexing and on one level follow a rigid ruleset and on another level don’t. I interpret that is why so many in the past had trouble implementing them. Rdbms is more defined in this way in that it accounts for routine and/or complete trends as well as failsafe and/or incomplete ones. It defines high volume breakouts (peaks) as well as low volume breakouts (troughs) as ftt’s. It also defines trend segments that can last a single bar which gaussians have a difficult time conveying. The one thing that rdbms doesn’t share completely with gaussians is the rigidness of the geometric container. This can be a perplexing crux given training one’s eye and applying SCT in real market conditions. It’s like one has to put an acquired skill to the side in order to gain a new one. How I see Jack’s work was moving a practitioner’s mind from coarse to finer and finer detail. He was constantly innovating. To use a metaphor, when one looks through a microscope, what was once perceived as smooth can appear very textured. Thus how initial ftt’s can lead to fbo’s and fanning as ‘What wasn’t That’ leads one to the true ftt. I interpret RDBMS as a descriptive and anticipatory language not necessarily a predictive one. It’s much more fluid. It does anticipate turning points pretty well on the 5m frame but I have yet to integrate it on larger timeframes (D,W,M) which include price action and the corresponding low volume of non-RTH trading segments.
There are guidelines and there are rules. In a simplistic way, a guideline is a rule with an implicit "but", whereas a rule has no associated "but". For instance the rule for approaching a yellow traffic light is to slow down and prepare to stop... but... if conditions are determined as safe, moving through the intersection while the light is yellow is acceptable. The rule associated with a yellow light is a guideline. The rule associated a red traffic light is stop. There is no but. The red light rule is a rule. >> So when a trend ends in DV or T FTT Containers have rules... FTT REQUIRES IV. Else you've got WWT. There is no such thing as a T FTT. Something IS amiss with your analysis. It is important to remember... Full-traverse (not ftt) can be a pt1. See pg 98 in channels for building wealth. Although not stated as such, Ftt is NOT a requirement for pt1!! Trends can and do end prematurely or incomplete. RULE: pt3 CAN NOT be less than pt1 for a long trend, and pt3 CAN NOT be greater than pt1 for a short trend. When this occurs, pt2 becomes pt1. See pg 99 in channels for building wealth. I don't have time right now to continue my ramblings on how the different methods are related or not. In the meantime, I suggest re-reading channels for building wealth.
WOW ! I take a one day break, and around 15 messages posted already... impressive ! You guys are really active, strong and hardly willing. I love that. Thank you for all your contribution that I'll read and explore granularly tomorrow a huge THANK YOU to you three. Take highly care of all you
Agreed mostly with everything you’ve stated except for the above. We’ll just have to be in disablgreement about that one. You’re certainly welcome to post your own annotated charts and logs to prove your point.
It's all in the materials. No need to prove! if you post your annotated charts with a T FTT, I am open to look and attempt to explain and/or provide snips from the originators where things went/are amiss.
It's all good. I believe we're discussing/mixing two different topics: 1. The Pattern, containers, etc. 2. EE of OOE, early ends, etc.
+ = NB : I took here the liberty to insert the FTT label inside the short container, to stick to the "each pt1 of any trend is inside the prior one"; and I also changed the color of the Pt1 of the long container which is on the original image in red, to green, to stick to the color of the long container. More posts are coming ...