Just my opinion ... I don't want to step on anybody's toes: Until I figured out how this method works profitably, I'd stick as close to its specifics as they were given by Jack Hershey and / or spydertrader. Only after I were consistently profitable, I might check another trading vehicle, another time frame, or I'd modify its principles. I don't recall either Jack Hershey or spydertrader trading, or describing, the futures method on something else than the 5 minute ES, during the regular trading hours. Sure, other time frames were mentioned, but only as possible helpers for trading the 5 minute chart. Spydertrader's approach doesn't overlap perfectly Jack Hershey's approach, neither on elite trader threads, nor on traders laboratory thread. Degapping wasn't part of the method from the beginning. At first, Jack was advising starting after the first 3 bars of the day. Degapping was introduced sometimes later to align, on the price pane, the opening of the day with the closing of the previous day, on the 5 minute chart. This made sense, because the after hours market is driven by different forces than the regular hours market. Much later, without being fully developed, the idea of degapping every 5 minute bar was suggested, but without much emphasis. The 2011 thread, referenced a few posts above in this thread, seems to discuss only day to day degapping of the 5 minute chart. 5 days of 81 bars each equal 405 bars for the week. Bottom line, everybody should trade whatever makes sense to them, as close or as far from the method's principles they like, but, again, if you don't master this method on the 5 minute ES during the regular hours, you make it more difficult for yourself to try to figure it out on another trading framework, in my opinion. I think it's great that people still discuss this method, and that it didn't get lost once Jack Hershey passed on, and spydertrader left.
According to OP’s permission I’m starting to post my attempts to understand PV relationship for mapping the market context. I will concentrate on 5 minute ES RTH, only price and volume, no indicators and no additional tools discussed lately in Spydertrader’s journal. 20-period SMA is of no use too. Reading the Spyder’s journal I failed to figure out how he and other traders use this one MA. For charts I will use standard bars coloration (close to open), time scale is exchange time, close of bar. The first annotated day is 09 April. The 15/00 bar is not included to the screenshot to avoid volume histogram excess. 1. The first hour provides clear context for uptrending tape, we have 1,2,3 points. We have dominating black volume, than non-dominating red and return to black dominance. 2. 9/35-10/10 is non-dom lateral movement inside the tape. 3. 11/00 bar is the black one because of coloration clos e to open, but really it is the first bar with lower high and lower low than previous and increasing volume the same time. But the RTL remains intact. Is it R2R transition or not? 4. 11/25 is clear R2R transition with BO of RTL and starting the first tape down. 5. 11/50 is B2B after short but full cycle down tape. 6. After 2 tapes 11/45-12/15 and 12/15-12/45 the obvious issue takes place: we have B2B transition followed by R2R at 13/05. I know it is not normal and some kind of mistake is present but fail to determine which one. The second screenshot is an alternative view. Is it the situation that @tiddlywinks talked about ‘volume defines containers and not visual geometry’? 7. The evening dynamics is clear acceleration of down tape.
When market are making HH or LL - fan trend lines i.e. tapes inside channels. 20MA was used as fine tool.
Maintain attention to the Volume and try to mark Gaussians. Don't worry to make mistake with Gaussians. Realize it and fixed it. You are on the right path and it just matter of time to gain experience and you will be clear to you What Must Come Next and you will be able to take appropriate Action in real time. Tip: You can download market replay data, run it 2x-4x speed and do this exercise like in "real time". Good luck.
Hi @kaizer : Volume defines containers is not a situation, it is the way it is. Volume leads price - always. I've attached docs you may or may not have yet discovered. Your "alternative" view, is you recognizing the nesting of fractals. I think the attachments will progress your understanding. The last one (fractalgauss) is something I cobbled together (chart/pics not mine) showing how trading on different fractals is carried out. Call the divisions whatever you like... tapes, traverses, channels, super dupers, leaves, branches, trees, forests, amazon rainforest, chickens, cows, goats, frogs. I just call them containers. Others here are significantly more stringent with naming convention than myself. No matter what it's called, each container has a beginning, a middle, and an ending, each recognized in volume. Good work kaiser!!
As an add-on exercise to volume defines containers, I will ask a few questions... Common knowledge (of JHPV) dictates the volume sequence as B2B2R2B or R2R2B2R. 1) What MUST occur in volume, to confirm or at least strongly suggest a point 1? 2) What MUST occur in volume, to confirm or at least strongly suggest a point 2? 3) What MUST occur in volume, to confirm or at least strongly suggest a point 3? 4) What point MUST be in place to BEGIN looking for an ftt/FTT? 5) What MUST occur in volume, to at least suggest an ftt/FTT?
SYM. DV. Wait. FWIW: I don't agree with the starting points of green. Imo, that first RTL breach nipple is a red fan. pt1 is the next bar which is qualified as ftt. Based on that, the narrow black container IMO, is "more better" as the working "green" container. In fact, I would say THAT container sequence completed. It's a daily, so lots not seen, but Friday may have been ftt. I can't tell. Also, it is very clear, since April, this entire up movement is non-dom. I don't see a pt1 of a slower wider container. It is not where it would be expected. Therefore I can't subscribe to this being a pt3 in the making of a slower wider container. It's a daily, so lot's not seen. JMHO.