On the 5x5, make the BM color the bar color of the Dominant leg and you have it. It would be better if instead of arrows you colored the bar with the arrow color. We are working with bars not candles. Although I’m not familiar of the context your version of the pattern was posted within, my guess is that ‘compressions’ would refer at times to doji’s or other bars where the fractal pattern completes within a bar. ie b2b2r2b as a gaussian annotation, the 2r2b occurs within a single bar. As one takes this pattern and includes more bars within it’s scope, there are times where the bars contained within each of the three moves of price and 4 moves of volume have a different ratio. So for say b2b, this move of price occurred over 10 bars, then 2r over 5, the final 2b could be the last bar of the 2r or just a single bar. This is what I would consider a ‘conpression’ of the pattern vs 10bars, 5bars, 5bars (as each letter is the same number of bars.) If you post the source of the pic, there might be some refinement or refutation of my interpretation. Edit: I just read Simples interpretation and definition which I agree with.
This is true. In the beginning answers given are direct, and if an answer was already given and the question still remains then there are other factors at play. Wchpl is at a different point in his learning curve. Thus would get a different reply than say if you posed the same question. At your point in the learning curve, there are questions that you don’t even know to ask. Thus why answers are locked by one’s ability to ask the right questions. I understand that you think automating this would be a good thing. A lot of the aspects of Jack’s system have been automated. However without a firm grasp of the application logic it would be counterproductive. Right now, for you to go to paper and pencil would be a good thing. Copy and pasting won’t change your thinking even though c&p is time saving and convenient. Your goal is to form new neural connections and associations. Handwriting is the fastest way to do that, I don’t quite know why but it works. This work is indeed a new paradigm and as such your perceptions based on beliefs of a different paradigm need to change in order for you to perceive from this new vantage point.
>> Sorry, but those are incorrect ID’s of volume. What? I did not ID the volume. It is the original chart from the OP. And good luck with exact volume matches bar-to-bar on narrow or sub/sub containers. Not without as-seen-only-in-real-time knowledge anyway. >> You’ll Have a difficult time getting the outputs of the Mondrian table to produce the correct number of turns and trend types for 30-40 trades a day on 5m ES. What makes you think I trade every 2 (to less than 3) bars of the 78 (out of 81) bars on a 5m rth-only chart? I don't! I use faster charts! As a day progresses I trade the intermediate or slower containers. And I don't mess with ES!
My intent is to be clarifying not confrontational. My mistake if taking you out of context or misquoting you.
To clarify myself... As a day progresses I trade the LEGS of intermediate or slower containers using rdbms triggers alongside knowledge of the guassian/container relationship. BM's are street signs for staying in the slow lane in my case. Carry On!
Some of the recent discussions reminded me of Jack's "sports memory", and about the following quote: I believe a point we should glean from this is that even if you don't have a full set of rules, repeatedly performing a task (that yields the correct result) teaches your subconscious, and you will eventually be able to do that task intuitively. Both Jack and Spydertrader repeatedly said that one shouldn't try to find and apply a fixed set of rules for this method. This is why automating the annotations and logging is counterproductive to learning, and to achieving good results.
Hi @Sprout, You are right that without understanding of application logic, automate the logging would be of no use. But the reason i want to automate it this is to gather facts, and I won't stop there. Facts without knowing how to apply and draw conclusion is meaningless. Facts only won't bring me to knowing the truth. Take for example a math problem. X + y = 5 (a), x = 3 (b). What is y? (c) To me a and b are facts. I need to understand them first before i can give conclusion on c. But now i have difficulties to access a and b in mada. As a result, i won't be able to draw mada conclusion. Having access to each mada component logic and automate it, means i get to know the a and b. I have programming knowledge and read many codes. I can judge whether code is good or not good. But for mada case, it's not about good or not, rather more on understanding how the mechanical work. There could be thousands of parts in a car. But to drive a car, one only needs to focus on certain parts/instruments. I'm not saying that certain things can be ignored. The truth is i still don't have access much on mada parts. With access to the script to automate, hopefully that can expand my mada horizon. @WchPl and I have spent long years time and tuition trying to understand the market. Sometimes i feel that is it good and proper to do where actually there are other things to do instead. But I don't like to give up and at the same time i also want to focus to non trading and non profit related stuff. I know only a few is chosen, many are not til rest of life. Hopefully we can be the chosen ones instead of. So if the can be finetuned to speed up in understanding, that is much appreciated. AB' PA is actually quite good. However, the probability is only 40-60% and money management stop loss very important. I'm not that good at the placement. A technique is like a car. If the driver is not in synch with the car, no matter how good the car is, it won't be optimal and beneficial. JHM is another car, and it's a promising one. Hopefully it can synch with me and don't have to find another car. Thanks @Sprout . Have a good and blessed weekend.
5x5 is updated. However, I'm not able to change the bar color. Not expert in image editor hehe. @Sprout, is it correct? @Simples , i have updated the pattern with additional CCC. Thank you all.
Hi @Sprout, @Simples, How to read the 'TP volume element ranges' in the attached? There are columns 'Volume Element', 'Repeat (New)', 'Rev Chron (New New)', 'Next (First)', 'Kill (Suppress)' and 'Gate (Permit)'. According to glossary, 'Repeat' is re-assignment of current volume element, 'Rev Chron' not found, 'Next' instruction to assign the next volume element in the current OOE, 'Kill' instruction to actively wait, do not allow something specific to be done even when it appears that things should proceed forward. prevents false activity, and 'Gate' instruction to allow for testing of a certain element (which element?). Take for example P1 & T1. I'm trying to interpret it. --- 'Volume Element': P1, is pt 1 of new up/down trend 'Repeat (New)': >=, re-assign P1 if current vol bar (must it be pt1 also? or assume it's pt1 in fractal timeframe lower than 5m?) is higher than the earlier P1 'Rev Chron (New New)': >=, how to read this? 'Next (First)': Assigned, how to read this? 'Kill (Suppress)': After T1, T2P, suppress / do not annotate current vol bar as P1 if it happens after T1 or T2P 'Gate (Permit)': After P2, T2F, how to read this? --- 'Volume Element': T1, is BO of rtl of old trend 'Repeat (New)': <=, re-assign T1 if current vol bar (must it be BO of rtl also? or assume it is in fractal timeframe lower than 5m?) is lower than the earlier T1 'Rev Chron (New New)': After P1 F(ailure), how to read this? 'Next (First)': After P2 onward, how to read this? 'Kill (Suppress)': After P2 onward, how to read this? 'Gate (Permit)': None, how to read this? Thank you.