Here is a beginning I started to begin easy with the first C-turn. It's a BO,T1. We're at the beginning of Set A. Next EE is BM. It's not in the "n" C-turns in a Set A. So it is an A-turn and still part of Set A of trends. I consult the MR table of Set A and see a pairing is found being as I have for an A-turn a BM,rev pairing existing. So it's an A-turn-BMrev EE-turn pairing. The MR is IDd now. The color is light yellow. Then, we enter into Set B of trends and our n-1 EE is a BM,rev. The next EE is BO,T1. Inside the Modrian, in Set B, no pairing is found so B-turn. So let's see into the MR in Set B, and a pairing between B-turn and BO,T1 is found. This B-turn, I should say in the same vein as the prior step is till part of a Set B although B-turn can only appear firstly in a Set C. The MR is IDd now. The color of th B-turn is yellow. Then we enter into Set C of trends, and our n-1 EE is BO,T1. The next EE is Ae, no pairing is found into the Modrian, so let's use the MR in Set C and search for a pairing : there is not. So... I'd say A-turn but this time it's maybe already in Set D. So it's like if the Set C did not appear on the chart. Like a jump from Set B to Set D. And then no color coding. Kind of weird. I'm surely wrong from here. We're in Set D, our n-1 EE is Ae. Next EE is BM,rev. No pairing is found in the Modrian so new B-turn. In the MR, the pairing exists. So A-turn dark orange colored. We're in Set D, our n-1 EE is BM,rev. Next EE is BO,T1. A pairing is found in the Modrian so C-turn, ending the Set D of trends and it will become the n-1 EE for the following Set A. I feel weak at this moment with that deduction. We're in Set A, n-1 EE is BO,T1. Next EE is both BM,rev and BO,T1. In the Modrian one pairing is found as for BO,T1 -> BO,T1 so I'd say C-turn ending Set A. We're in Set A, our n-1 EE is BO,T1 and BM,rev. Next EE is PP1. Whichever n-1 EE we consider, no pairing is found in the Modrian. So A-turn. In the MR no pairing is found too being as in the FS row as an n-1 EE no A-turn wan appear with n EE being PP1. So A-turn and it's already part of Set B. And no color coding. We're in Set B, n-1 EE is PP1. Next EE is both BM,rev and BO,T1. In the Modrian a pairing is found with BO,T1. So C-turn, ending Set B of trends, and beginning next Set A. I think it's already enough to let you/myself know where I am, what I get and miss. To give me a little rest about it, I'll now take a little break of 25min, then will do a log, post it, then will go to the gym and when back I'll rework on the chart snippet I posted here. See you later and take care of you
MADA on 07/05/19 & Logs As I'm both still unable to work simultaneously with the Modrian/MR tables as I'm loging and i'm struggle to get it with the use of those tables, I post a non-full log/charts. I had already began last week to label the first turns but I'll refine them. Ignore them for now. I finally won't go to the gym but will take now a little rest and will try to apply all I have in mind, the turns and trends ID on this chart. Posting soon
Well, this chart as for labeling turns and trend set types has been frustrating as BO,T1 as been the very most frequent EE so many C-turns appear. I feel I have my brain focused so much on VTP/EEs that I can't find the energy to open it to how the turns and trend sets works. So to speak, how to use the Modrian and the MR. I'm searching and thinking about what kind of exercise (like for example the mindmap for EEs that I've finally put aside to stick to the "do MADA and logs before anything") I could do to understand how those two tables work. I'm wondering what I can do to get it. It will come a way or another. With that said I see I understand (I'm not saying it's true, I'm saying it's chat i've understood) is that : - a trend starts with/at a C-turn. On the next EE, the EE that appeared and made surge C-turn becomes the n-1 EE, and the new one is the n one. - there are two possibilities : either this n EE is in the Modrian and has a pairing from prior EE n the cell it is OR there is no pairing. if there is a pairing, another C-turn has appeared and we reset Set A. - if there is no pairing, the trend progresses and we have then advanced forward with an A-turn. At this moment, this A-turn is still inside the prior Set A. So we look into the MR and see if a pairing exist. And here, it's not that obvious.Let's say for example our n-2 EE was BO,T1 , then or n-1 EE was PP1 so no pairing in the Modrian has been found. So we look at this moment in the MR...but where ? being as PP1 in Set A is in the Routine cell and it's green coored, I deduce we're to look in the MR in Look In Set A, and being as we're searching for an A-turn I search for PP1 in the green part on the right column (EE) and see if there is an A-turn on the left. This appears, on line number 11. That is the way I understand things for now. - something fuzzy for me at the moment is that there are moments when neither on Modrian nor on MR any pairing is found. So I wonder what is to be done here. On the chart I posted I arbitrary assigned the next turn in the "order of elements" of the turns into a given Set of trend. I don't know if this is true although I don't see any other way to do it at the moment. - Another thing is with the "at this moment, the A-turn is still part of Set A". Then, what I understood with the rest of the comment I have had about it is that it's at this moment (in Set A, the new EE does not lead to pairing in Modrian but does lead to one in the MR) the bow of the turn is to be color coded like the MR is. I don't know if that is an interpretation or a comprehension of truth. - the last thing I have in mind at the moment is that the logic says any turn is to be on the same side as the corresponding BM on the chart. And any EE has its Turn associated. So I suspect any Turn has its EE associate too. What causes me issue is when an OB and an AndPP4/PP4/NotAndPP4 comes along on a P1 assigned, for example on a BO,T1. This echoes to a problem I talked about previously and that remains problematic for me today. In addition to that, currently, I wonder what is to be done if I consider the underlined sentence to be true, when an OB comes along on a BO,T1 for example and making a PP4 : in this scenario, P1is assigned on the OB and another one will be assigned on the next bar. So there will be two BM, so surely two turns BUT only one EE. This happens on my chart. If I skip the second BM and do not associate a turn to it, I find myself after with turns and BM on the opposite side which is not supposed to happen. So I arbitrary, here, put a C-turn on the second BM which has not EE associated on the same bar. It happens on 10:50am bar. I will maybe stop for today cause currently I can't find something that would help me to go forward. See you later in the day or tomorrow.
The essence of JHM is a methodology based on a system. The system is based on a structure. Observing the market structure derives a pattern. The pattern is used by applying a process. As the process is applied consistently via the injection of inputs, it produces consistent outputs. This is why engaging in the process of MADA is also auto-correcting. As one debrief’s the outputs and compares them to the granularity of the market, the feedback loop stimulates new questions by which to select alternative inputs that feedback results with greater or lesser accuracy. These selection of inputs are like the use of scaffolding in construction. They are useful for a certain period of time and allow for multiple passes over the same section of a building as one applies different processes. There are some errors and omissions that can be corrected with the next successive pass, other errors and omissions not-so-much. There is WCB, WHN and WMCN. In your write up, you changed your logic in the transition between Set A, B and Set B, C. Your feelings gave an indication of this as you continued to Set C and D. Trend A is a listing of trends composed of a single leg. Set B, two legs, Set C, three legs, Set D, an even pairing of A-B type turns. Since Set D is a drift type trend, one can also dwell within this trend set longer than the others. Trends progress and get built in an irreversible manner, they don’t skip over a prior leg. A trend with a single leg cannot have a third leg without also having two legs. Trends continue until they fail. Then they begin again in the opposite direction. This is the market cycle. Go to the gym. Take a break, engage in an enjoyable activity. Just like music, there is meaning in the space in-between notes - similarly, in assimilating new information, the unconscious has it’s role to play.
For the moment put the OB’s aside so that the turn types can come into greater clarity. With the Modrian, it’s output is T or F, which leads to next. With the MR it’s output is T or F, which leads to _____.
At first sight, just by the name of the "move reversal" Id'say "which leads to prior". Or rather and clearer, "stay in" the current type of trend. Which would echoe to the "at this moment the A-turn is still part of Set A" although A-turn appears firstly in Set B. I have to think about this. I'm rereading all your comments here on the use of the Modrian and MR tables to get more clarity.