I am understanding Jacks quote to mean; a BO T1 is only a BO T1 if we either: 1) have already had a T1 and then we have a BO of an rtl and /or 2) if without previously having had a T1 yet, we BO an rtl with dec vol. (the dec vol being the T1). Is this what Jacks quote is saying ? If so, then we do have a B0 T1 on bar 4 because we BO the rtl with dec vol (?). PS: many thanks to Heroic for starting this thread and everyone for being a part of it. My apologies for any obvious and not so obvious signs of ignorance on my part.
My two cents, if I may: I believe that the circuit of rtl BO = True and T1 = True can yield a BO T1 even if both of the True's occur on the same bar, and that bar is the first T1. Going from the posted charts is a little less reliable than direct text from Jack, but it seems that the rtl is drawn beginning from an EE bar in the direction of the current sentiment when possible. Once the rtl is up, it seems to override the BM as the active fail-safe metric. I don't believe BO T1 can occur with the rtl BO during P1 re-assignment before the first T1, but it can occur on the bar of the first T1, any any bar in the subsequent OOE which closes outside the rtl afterwards. Here are some examples I've compiled of the circumstance happening. Multiple times, there is an annotation of BO T1 occuring on the exact bar that T1 occurs for the first time, as is in [12-17] Bar 4. Jack states: "As you annotate volume and have a T1, then you can use the BO of the rtl as a slightly prrofitable trade. It is named a BOT1." This leads me to believe that it is possible for the rtl to be in-tact before the assignment of T1, and a T1 immediately gates the BO T1 fail-safe for any bar which closes outside the rtl, even if that bar is the same one that was our first T1. Hope this makes sense. Edit: I didn't see Filter's post until after I had written this; we seem to have the same opinion.
jack hershey, If you happen to see this post, please read it. I would like to thank you for all of the content that you have introduced over the past two weeks. It has been a several days since you have posted in the thread, and I just wanted to know the current status of our efforts, if that isn't too much to ask. I don't feel entitled to your time, but would just like to know where things stand. Have other circumstances taken up your time lately, or have you decided to discontinue our transference process? I just wanted to make sure that there hasn't been a miscommunication, or to know if things have been put on hold for the time being. I feel that I have had a clear understanding of the process up until when we decided to do Volume Test Drills for the week of [12-16] to [12-20], and post questions which arise during the process. The next step from there isn't clear to me, perhaps it has been instructed but I have failed to understand it. I have been doing the work in the mean-time, and have completed multiple logs for each of the days so far. I have continued to learn about the process, and feel that I have a decent grasp on the Volume Element assignment, End Effects, and reading the Modrian table for turns, but have difficulty mapping out a profitable set of c turns on some days, particularly for [12-17]. I suspect there is something I am missing which I am unaware of. I have been attempting to the best of my ability to avoid inventions, and trying to digest too much at once since I was advised as such, so I have stopped focusing on learning the Modrian table and turns at this time. Hope you are doing well, and thank you again for all of your time and effort so far. -- Here are most of the logs that I have completed recently. [12-16] Attached