Reading some of the green stuff from @Sprout 's nice JHM pdf. https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/sexy-idea.22612/#post-338977 Quote of choice from that thread: "Additional Protective Action (APA) is the last thing a person usually adds to trading once they are in the groove vis a vis continuous trading."
Searching with Haskell Price Case and jack hershey yielded this little buried gem: https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/the-bottom.253439/ River asks great questions! Toward the end of the thread are some insights on laterals.
What is "trading fractal", subfractal? https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...jan-in-mathematics.256404/page-8#post-3753610
Excerpt from your link... I leave it to the practitioner to determine the integrity and efficacy of the numerous and seldom if ever used or referenced "not" and "not not" differentiation labels versus the standardized VTP, n+1 testing, and EE nomenclature, purpose, and results.
In your above image, and depending on your level of differentiation and skill level, the Trading Fractal would be the fractal Trend that is composed of M1 to M2 to M3. The sub-fractals would be M1 and M2 and M3 as individual legs of the trading fractal. Each of these independent Moves would also be composed of it's own m1->m2->m3 as even faster fractals and in this context sub sub-fractals. The volume elements in your image need refinement. It's easier to start with a Set C complete trend composed of three legs that has a Dom move, a non-Dom move, a Dom to FTT move as those legs. The archetype volume would be P1 to T1 to P2 to T2 to P3 as a shorthand notation and P1 to T1 to P2 to T2x to P3x (where x = T or F) as more detailed notation for the Trading Fractal. The price geometry points of pt1, BO of RTL, pt2; correspond to P1, T1, P2 bars of volume. Move 2 of say a Set C Trend would have a price geometry of pt2 to pt3 and a corresponding volume element of P2 to T2P/T2F. Move 3 of the same Set C Trend would have a price geometry of pt3 to FTT and a corresponding volume element of T2P/T2F, not T2P, not T2F, not not T2P, not not T2F, P3P/F. The FTT of price would correspond with P3P. P3F is when a trend fails to end. Move 3 of a Set C Trend would also have a coincident volume element of T2x (to) P3x (x = Pass or Fail.) The (to) encapsulates the prior 'not T2x and not not T2x' which can be interpreted as sub and sub sub fractals within the larger fractal's Move 3. In other words, the 'not T2x' and 'not not T2x' act as placeholders for the path to get to the P3P (as an EE) or P3F (as a trend continues.) It's helpful to think of it as further progression of trend within the context set by T2P as upper and T2F as lower boundaries. EE's found within the bands that are active are equivalent to a P3P. It makes more sense with the HVBO's than the LVBO's and either case is the success of a trend to end. The HVBO's are easier to see as a P3. The key is understanding the 'not' and 'not not' is the role and function of Next as it relates to logging and come after a certain context is set. Performing the VTP is more important than understanding the 'not' and 'not not' which quite frankly can have one experience quite of bit of 'knotting' in their mind. Better access is to understand the five interlocking OOE's and hierarchy. The best access is MADA via annotating and logging. The VTP is the key. google using elitetrader as the website and 'not not T2P' to get to the threads where Jack discusses the above. The pieces are there, but it does take some deduction to get to the proof.