In hindsight it was silly not having 4100 more on my mind. In fact flipping over one page in my notebook these are levels I had written 4140, 4100, 4082, 4042/4040. These were written last night. Sometimes following the prep eludes me and I am not sure why. Yesterday also. Had 59 as a level (planned the night before) and I just wasn't ready as the market opened. I think the overnight action threw me a bit. Live and learn. Attached is a chart for context before the open.
A move like that used to freak me out. Now though after spending time with a "faster" interval next to the 1m the "size of the bar" isn't much of a concern because you can see on the faster interval the quick RETs and stutter steps more clearly. This move in particular though did not have much pullback except for right before we broke 86 and a minor stutter at 88 after the break of 86.
There is actually a minor tickq divergence right at 97.25 at the top where we held. Didn't notice that early. Not that I'd do anything with it but it's noted. Thanks for bringing that move up
A note. Poor proofreading is not an indication of my level of intelligence hahahahaha. Also my apologies for not speaking in terms of pace and activity of some of these moves. It's a lot to note in real time.
Some psychological/fear stuff...The goals I had of obtaining a "better" price with cheaper risk really was nothing more than fear manifesting it's ugly head again. The ebb and flow of price really isn't so "tight" and the SLA itself is in away about going with the flow of price and is almost a bit more "free flowing" or "loose" I'll say. So you can't play a loose/free flowing strategy with a set "tightness." All that is going to do is make me tight and the tighter I am the less focused I am on supply and demand and more on the closeness of price to my stop point. Now some trades like for example a "double bottom with TICKQ divergence" if you enter very close to the second bottom and it's at a prior level of context well then yea placing a stop under those lows is justified and it is typically a "tight" stop. Either way I 100% have to know what I need to see to say in a trade and what I need to see to exit. Then the stop pretty much becomes irrelevant and in a way so does the entry. If you can obtain the skills necessary to detect these shifts at the earliest instance of the shift with a level of consistency everything kind of takes care of itself. That is now my goal. Skill acquisition not cheap trades. I had the intentions of trading live but again I digress. However, mark my words, this will be a great life changing year.
Trading SLA last year this is probably what I would have done. Getting "lucky" on the first long probably keeps me positive for the day and gives a false sense of "confidence." Greens longs, red shorts, blue exits. Thinking about the fact that even stupidly the SLA keeps you positive in that regard is food for thought. Couple the strategy/method with a better understanding of flow and price movement....hmmmmm
I used to find that "phenomena" almost amazing how that happens but now I'm starting to realize exactly why it's happening. It's not so amazing anymore and it's not a phenomena. It just makes sense.
I just wanted to note the SLA chart w entries is not what I did today. It's what I would have done right around this time last year when I opened the other journal. Nor is what I showed via the SLA indicative of what should have been done. It's just based on my past what I MAY have done prior to whatever improvements on reading price I have made. I compared that "what MAY" chart with my analysis today.