@WchPl Attached is a doc found elsewhere FOR TAPING. It is not new, but you may not have seen it. In looking at your "more info" and "less info" methods of taping, you are not considering volume, or you are and just not showing the volume. It (volume) does affect 2-adjacent-bars points 1/2/3. The doc is helpful with that in mind. Also, remember to apply "the rules" for FS. 1) BOT1 ... a measurable trough creates RTL. A non-internal with increasing volume creates the break. If the BO bar crosses but does not close beyond the RTL, you have a FBO. If you do not have a volume trough BEFORE the break, your RTL is mis-placed. 2) BMRev ... A BM price breach. Geometrically, at the moment of breach, the previous point 2 becomes point 1. A breach of a BM with an internal bar "suggests" a mis-identified BM. Just as a mention, Jack considers OB an internal. I do not agree. Good work!
The more I (re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re...) read your messages, the more I see, feel, sense and understand that : - trading is building - before begining / while doing, one needs to de-construct. I really need to clean up all the mess I have in mind, deconstruct a lot of erroneous "knowledges and certitudes" I had, before being able to integrate properly and cleanly anything new. I need to revisit the basics, I need to take the time to do it, and I give you all three a huge thank you for leading me to understand/remind me that. Thank you. This day has been hard for me. Really hard...the kind of "I can't even get up of my bed"...I've felt a lot of despair, powernessless, and incapacity to doubt my doubt. Your messages are helping me to feel some power to hold on more. Thank you for your support. Remember that behind those posts you read, there's a human being, who has been giving it all and sacrifying almost everything to get to where you know I wanna be, for more than 4 years now, although you've been "only" reading me for 1 year and some..
I wasn’t gonna bring this up until later but since it’s being put on the table now,... One of the things that is challenging about jack’s chart’s illustrated on TN is that platform’s inability to degap. There is a certain class of OB’s that are considered internals. They exist if they are a lat3 after a Sym on lat2. When one gets into “squishing” internals into the prior XB or XR this makes more sense. Even if internals are on lat2 and lat3, lat4 as an OB is only not internal if it’s H and L surpasses the shadow cast by lat1. It gets more complicated when say lat3 is a ftp or fbp and lat4 is an OB compared to lat3. However if one follows the rule set for internals and “squishing”, the lat2 gets “squished” into lat1 and lat3 gets “squished” into lat1/2 and the form of what was initially an OB compared to lat3 now becomes an XR or XB when compared to the “squished” combo bar lat1/2/3. It’s easier to see on the logs where price case within laterals are not logged whereas volume elements within those laterals are and that the splitting of a row is not performed on an OB presenting within a lateral boundary. The above can be super confusing and by working through it, it clears up a lot of stuff around internals and laterals. I like to think of it like 6 5m bars within a 30m. The 5m’s could be trending and extending the high or lows of the 30m bar extremes or the 5m’s could be experiencing deceleration just as a lateral functionally does within a trend.
It's a long lonely offbeat road for sure. Different OP for OB may be consistent INT, 1 or 2 levels. As processing OBs wrong would mess up OOE, INT may make sense at first as training wheels in order to flesh out VTP and EE for normal bars. 1 level is same as any bar but with translation following 2nd leg and more in-line with trend. 2 levels not entirely sure of it all and could end up inconsistent, so using 1 for now as OP. DG, squishing, TF, Lat, Stitches, OB need deduction, bit tough to visualize. Retro makes INT measurable and affects volume not price form. Varying OPs may lead to more of self-correction, configurability and flexibility of mind, why hunt for the 0ne grail is like running in circles. For RDBMS, refining OP could be filtering or seeing it in relation to other OP like SCT, PVT, etc. Even though LTL rarely annotated in past charts, parallellogram processing makes some sense for RDBMS, though as FS OP, gaussian, taping, etc. not so much in my current OP. Also remember allow yourself to relax, let the subconscious deepen space for differentiation.
I've been doing some iterative refinement and came across these references that are relevant to the current discussion. Here's a post that is a reference to the above quoted concept, post616 and post641 also have further detail with "squishing": https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...-on-a-daily-basis.275733/page-65#post-3843657 In going over the referenced thread, it seems that Jack consider's Lat4 as retro when the close is within the lateral boundary not the H and L of the bar compared to Lat1. The 7-15-2013 chart has this particular definition of retro. Upon further reflection, I can see why he doesn't write price cases in when a lateral is active. edit: Squishing, retro and arrows for Use Larger are referenced in post 173, 203, 389, 419, 423, 615, 616, 624,... also as a side note: Post 427 is also Jack rebuke of some of the criticism received in: https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/the-jack-hershey-public-record-thread.262444/
Lats require three bars to be defined. Bar 1 has H and L. bars two and three cannot exceed H and L. After bar 3 (bar 4 and onward) the close cannot exceed the H and L. If and when the close exceeds H or L, then a BO has occurred. To fit the lats into the trading approach I have been using a "retro" set of rules. On bar 4 I begin to go back to unnamed bars (in volume) and name them. Every bar is named without exception. this continues going forward until break out of the lateral. If a turn has occurred, practically speaking, I get on the correct side of the market ASAP. https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...-on-a-daily-basis.275733/page-86#post-3885219 Indeed, I cannot find any reference to Retro only going from Lat4 or Lat7 onwards, only that some posts claim Lat7 to be the Retro bar in lats. So with this logic, Lat4 TRUE means all Lat bars measurable. May sometimes get more EE's and even past BO, T1's.
Not sure why/where this lateral discussion came about but perhaps these 2 Jack posts are pertinent/helpful. Like other aspects of JH, a work in progress. NB: the posting dates... I am posting them in descending chronological, most recent first. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- After a two bar "internal"(the 8 cases of waiting), you have to do work to log the next row. Mentally fold the second bar into the first bar. Thus you know the H and L of the "squished bar equivaalent. You may then "see" translation for making money. If not the bar is named lat 3. This is the case named lateral. As you do undrstand, it (the bar) arrives as a wait. Laterals can go on for quite a while. we number them as lat x's. we also note their endings with BO and the XB or XR that occurs. One caution. To qualify lats after lat 3 a new rule is used: The close of the bar is the only significant measure. The close must NOT be outside of the H and L of the lateral. #11 Dec 20, 2013, Thread: Market System of Operation --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Laterals ! A lateral becomes present by: 1. squish the pair forming the first two bars. 2. note the H and the L. 3. Bar 3 is not ouTside the H or L. 4. record the price name as lat3. The lat continues until BO which means BreakOut. Here is the test for each succeding bar of the lateral. 1. The prior price name is latn where n is 3 or more. 2. An H test is performed with the close and H; the maths is Close < = H (in the context of latn). AND 3. A L test is performed with the close and L; the maths is Close > = H (in the context of latn). 4. The AND between 2. and 3. means both MUST be True. 5. BO is the OR of 2 and 3 where the "FALSE" output of 2 and three are OR'ed. As you see this logic can extend as long as the lateral BUT at the BEGINNING of lat 7 (whether it ocurs on bar close or not, a retro process begins and then continues as long as the lateral continues and when it BO's. I have been kept in the dark in the absence of annotations and displays and completed logs. the lat 7 RETRO is as follows: 1. Use the column to the right of the EVENTS column and label it lat sub. 2. Fill in the volume event for all lat bars so far. There will be EE's label them P3P whether or not a full trend ends. I tried to provide all PP's by now. 3. Assign P1's properly. If in the future there are improper P!'s assignments I will say they are too late. 4. As bar lat7 comes to an end, if it is not a lat7, do not make use of retro and return to normal price permission after this bar did the BO and either do UL naming or if not UL then write WAIT in that bar row. 5. If lat 7, then keep doing lat stuff and log sub fractal every bar. When you get this in hand, we can do trading strategy after you deal with the other two outstanding learning issues. #241 Feb 12, 2013, Thread: Volume
@tiddlywinks I appreciate you bringing this up and the various compilations you have generously provided to date. As you are aware, laterals by far is one of the most confusing aspects of price discovery in general and as such need some other distinctions in place before attempting to discern the intricacies and distinctions within them. JHM illuminates this with a clarity I've not seen with any other work. It's quite a testament to the power of building the mind with deduction and logic from the market's granularity that he advocated throughout his presence here on ET. A person without a firm understanding of the market's fractal nature, the 'pattern' or of the permission/suppression circuitry of volume, it's daunting as the best case and impossible at the worst case. That's why in learning RDBMS in particular, building the BM's and rtl's in preponderance covers all bases and then from there it's easier to exclude what is not as Jack would put it "stat sig." It's also easier to do the fanning and acceleration of these rtl's as a bridge from SCT even though that's not really done on Jack's RDBMS 5m charts, whereas it's more applicable on the 30m. Both charts are used in parallel (among the other displays - YM2, OTR, DOM, T&S, etc.) of market data with the method when trading during RTH. Jack would bridge this context of laterals for beginners by recommending sidelining and placing bracket orders at it's boundaries to enter via the resulting XR, XB of the BO after CCC would occur. As one's differentiation advances, the movements within a lateral can be tracked with precision. Sometimes that precision is to encapsulate space, shape and change of shape into a context that is relevant to the task at hand. I admit, when first looking at Jack's RDBMS charts, what I was first experiencing was more confusion than any sort of precision. My understanding on this is that Retro's are a class which contain two members; Lat4 as 'retro' and Lat7 is 'lat sub' or 'retro of a sub lateral.' If one thinks about this, the logic correlates. On Jack's chart's, the colored blobs (not associated with move reversals) track the BO of the laterals and lat7 "retro's" are a blue or yellow vertical stripe. Why is it blue or yellow at times? Idk, maybe my color printer needs ink!
In my own process of iterative refinement, even though the text is descriptive, until recently what I thought I read and had been using as an 'operating point' was that the lat4.H <= lat1.H and lat4.L >= lat1.L as True for lat4 retro to be True. Having just lat4.C <= lat1.H and lat4.C >= lat1.L is a little refinement for me that makes a subtle yet tangible difference.