I recently downloaded a free 14day forex trial of Fibonacci Trader from www.fibonaccitrader.net I am finding that this software is very advanced and intense I am trying to work out this Multiple Time Frame theory using Fibonacci Zones can anybody tell me how this is supposed to work? Does anyone have FT? Regards,

My best advice would be to read the Fibonacci Trader Journals that Robert Krausz wrote and included for free on the homepage for Fib Trader. Aside from that Perry Kauffmann writes a bit about it in his book Trading Systems and Methods.

It would be better to create your own Daily/Weekly charts and apply your ideas. See, for example, the http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/47028 application. It is the Daily and Weekly Stochastic on the same chart as independent functions. The result is an easy interpretation of the Daily/Weekly divergence, quite interesting for partial profit taking techniques. Fibonacci Daily/Weekly formulas are rather simple , IMO and you may apply your favorite Fibonacci criteria when you control the formula.

=================== Also the post ''Monthly [1] Weekly [2] Daily [3] '' in this tek analysis forum helps. ======================= ''The plans of the diligent tend only to advantage''- Solomon,trader king

Great software I've been using for years. Really helps by showing multiple time frames in 1 chart !!!! You can base your indicators on any time frame so you will be able to see all the trends in ONE chart. By the way, The Fibonacci Trader homepage is : http://www.fibonaccitrader.com

Multiple time frame is ESSENTIAL CONCEPT whatever the framework (including my own of course) because of fractality's nature of stock market. If I can caricature information is less in datas that in the sequence and even in the structure (architecture - I prefer that term to geometry which is too restricted) of datas (if I wanted to I could make a 10 pages philosophy on that beginning with the father of Statistic Control : Walter Shewart since he is the first who really realises that at the beginning of the century although it is not for trading domain but for industrial quality domain - I have been quality engineer at the beginning of my carreer I didn't suspect that it could serve me one day for many other domains ). This is at least true for market and DNA genetic structure although for stock market nobody has never demonstrated it officially since Mandelbrott's model is just a measuring tool not a physical (causal) model and Elliottism is not a model per se it is a framework. As for my model I don't want to make any scientific official publication since I have no interest to do so. As for the journal I remember to have read a few paragraphs and that it was interesting.

It sounds like you got a very sophisticated, but scientific model. My question is: is it neccesaary to go so far for profitable trading? I simply understand one of the key factor for profitable trading is the interaction among different time frames. Also I simply use water wave as my metaphor for the market. Do I need to have a sound philosophical model to backup my trading technique.

No it is not necessary, if it was necessary I would be the only trader on the planet . But it is like a few centuries ago when engineers built vapor machines without knowing Carnot's Theorem since such machines have been invented before carnot discovers that law. The only problem is that the machines have poor performance and exploded without reason because the engineers didn't understand the true nature of vapor . Nevertheless even after Carnot's theorem was known all the ancient know-how was still useful since if you don't know how to build a machine Carnot's theorem is useless. So it is the same for my model. It can add power if you already know how to trade. If you don't it is uselesss. As to adding power to traditional TA it is from indicators methods to Gann, Elliott and even Dow theory, in fact my model is the modern evolution of Dow Theory) or to new methods like Camarilla (which is my prefered one because it is a pivot approach and since my model deals with price-time - since for my model both constitute tight dimensions and not separate dimensions - but that in fact time is a pure artefact in "reality" everything comes to know key price levels. That is why although the model is sophisticated, first you don't have to cope with the equations set since I give the results of calculation, second the method can be as simple as using pivot methods with more power. Nevertheless it is really new and so you have to really open your mind to strange phenomenas that appears on the model like backwardation in time and simultaneous travel in past and future like in Science fiction or modern physics theories on time although ganntistes have somehow that kind of notion of retracement in time ). Also it is the trend individual traders will more and more face fast automatic trading systems which are somehow dumb compared to a good human trader but their number will grow and little by little you can find one day that your trading is becoming more and more difficult without even understanding what is happening. It is then that you need to change. But change is never easy so if you don't prepare for that you can be out of trading at term.

For example see http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21953 a reputed technical analyst said this: "Since 1997 the majority of financial institutions make research on volatility analysis (IFTA Congress, Roma 1998). The research done in Engineering Schools and Universities laboratories are about the use of Volatility. So it seems to me that if individuals want to compete with professionals they will have to fight on the same field. " iWhat he refers to is the trend of Quantitative finance modelisation whose current fashion is to deal with Ito lemma (see an example of mumbo jumbo on that domain here for example : http://www.wilmott.com/messageview.cfm?catid=19&threadid=4330) My model is also a quantitative finance model but it really make the missing link with traditional TA it is the only deterministic model that probably exists or at least exposed today (although I do it on a narrow basis since I didn't publish it officially in a scientific or econometric journal) whereas all others are only based on stochastic approach (the above Ito lemma approach). So my model is much more understandable than a bunch of equations of so called wiener process and alike.

Many centuries before Carnot and his principle, Heron of Alexandria designed steam machines both theoretically and manually. [for a quick review see http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Heron.html] Some Heron Â´s principles were wrong, but, the machines were working and this is the most important. The theoretical background is not the only way to trade [with sucess] the markets.