Home > General Topics > Trading > On 10-case geometry and beyond

On 10-case geometry and beyond

  1. Creating this thread inspired by TA-discourses in this thread from this post onwards:

    Instead of trying to summarize (dumb down) a creative Q&A-session, it is best to try to follow the posts and replies in that thread first, preferably try to deduct and analyze for oneself in order to confirm and learn/refer to some of the concepts presented.

    @Sprout : My hope is we could continue where we left off here, and not be bothered or bothering people who are not open to different ideas about TA.

    In my own journey, although I've been exposed to alot of TA-concepts, but never really got to use it much myself. It seems everyone has their own ideas about TA, and most ideas are utterly confused, so important to gain clarity, and remain humble despite success or failures.

    A problem that has haunted me with trading, is how to establish the "right" context. Often we focus on too short timeframes, and get blasted by higher timeframes. So I'm wondering, what if you start at The "highest timeframe", and analyze down top-bottom? How to make sense of it. Here's an example, and on EOQ bars seems to be without SYM:


    I've made a few annotations, the ones I think should be correct according to previous discourse. Guessing direction seems easier on higher timeframes, although of course the risk needs to be lowered, and maybe there's more information to be gleamed from this chart?

    Does this make sense, or is there more information on lower timeframes (TF), and we get more information from there? Then this TF could be just to establish dominant direction (and we can find counter-movements and better entries on lower TFs?)

    I do like the way trendlines may signal breakouts, and may be adjusted by pt3s and pt2s as well, and am interested in examples how to read volume.

    Is it good to start with a big picture like this (this is all the bars for this particular stock, which is Danish).

    CC: @dratsum and others that might be interested in this topic, and hopefully more people can chime in and gain some benefit, though I will suggest replies be within the framework discussed here and in the other thread.

    This is all meant to be education material, and in no way suggestions for trades or investments.
  2. Thank you for starting this thread.

    If we go back to the 5x5 grid that has the real body colored. Extend the coloring so that the high and low tails are colored as well. The doji's are different. They remain colored how they are.
    The bars can be sorted into three piles. The piles are the number of legs that are within a bar. How many of these bar cases are in each pile?

    A leg is defined as a movement in price from moment in time A to moment in time B, both occurring within a single bar.

    The doji begins to come into view. Interesting enough, regardless of the organizing logic one uses to construct it, the doji's appear in a certain zone. If we go through a price chart and use a pencil to keep track of which of these prices show up on the grid and where, we begin to discern movements across this grid.

    This next piece can be observed only by a live chart. As a bar builds notice the doji. Where price came from to get to it, and where price went after it's appearance on a single bar.

    This next drill supports the doji distinction. Take a PV bar chart. The annotation exercise is to draw a line from the H of the first bar to the L of the next bar if long. If short then draw a line from the L of the first bar to the H of the next bar. The resulting chart should look like a zigzag with no gaps between bars.

    We are moving to ID'ing turns with the help of volume. The above drills are supportive to view the distinction.
  3. I'm happy, and honoured, to continue. Here's the bar-permutations with full session colouring:


    With legs to run on:


    1 leg: 2
    2 legs: 14
    3 legs: 9

    Doji's seems to share properties with bars "almost doji".

    I'll be back! :)
  4. Comments within quoted text.
  5. Do the same drill with the 1st grid.

    Another way of describing the legs of bars is the opposite side of the coin. This is a different context. We shift context to describe a phenomenon to produce insight. We work to form a complete system.

    That there are 3 legs to every bar. There are Two bars with the 1st AND 3rd missing. Fourteen bars with the 1st OR 3rd missing. Nine Bars with all legs present.

    One of either side of the coin will have this following statement be true: ALL 2nd Legs of Bars are the Dominant Sentiment.

    Which one?

    What is Dominant Sentiment?
  6. Grid-items numbered like this below:


    Finding intrabar movements going from one extreme to the other on the diagram, of course the market "turning on a dime" and rounding off tops in either 1 or more bars:


    I've drawn lines according to "colour" of the latest bar (bar #1) below, which shows some nice dynamics. As price FTT in congestion zones, the lines zig-zag (chop), while lines level off during accelerated moves:


    Posting this for now as need more time to look into the other parts :)

    Some working music:

    UPDATE: Horizontal grid with colour and legs.

    Legs seems correllated with agreement / disagreement:
    • 1 leg means no disagreement.
    • 2 legs means either open or close is in agreement with high or low.
    • 3 legs means both open and close is disagreeing with high and low.


    1-leg is pure dominance (for that timeframe).
    Dominance will complete with the last leg (close).
    2-legs ends leg #2 with a close, so leg #2 is dominant sentiment.

    So the 14 bars will all have 2nd leg dominant.

    Dominant sentiment will be the winning direction (the one who laughs last! :D).


  7. (Updated bottom of previous post with other replies.)

    Volume peaks seems to be alternating (green, red), also with price extremes (topping/bottoming/extreme movement):


    Link to online chart.
  8. K. Now that you have a catalog of ends. We take that chart and draw a thicker line that connects all the pairs of bar's to define and see trend segments.

    For example, 4,5,8 is a trend segment long, 8,9,10 is a trend segment short, 10,11 long, etc,...
    You are drawing a line along the long axis of the parallelogram/s. (The longest line that can be made)

    The long axis is the middle of profit taking segments. The ends are peaks of bars - HH and LL in any given traverse.
  9. Assuming we want to avoid BO of given TL, using RTL and extending that:


    Kind of like laserbeams this, separating PA.

    BO on 9-10th May signals end of bullishness (on this chart).
    19th May and 13th Jun has rising bullish volume while breaking high volume TLs.
    1st Jul has bullish volume and exceeds volume as far back as 15th May, which is already BO.
    Possible change of sentiment? Also HL on higher TF between 29 May and 29 Jun on lower bearish volume. After this only one bearish TL not BO or FBO remaining.

    UPDATE: 1st Jul is also VE, although earliest in possible long trend, volume is there short-term.
  10. When annotating tapes, traverses and channels the convention is gray/blk thin, next thicker line different color less opaque, next thicker line same color more opaque. Next Channel's tapes are gray/blk thin, then different color less opaque, next thicker line same color more opaque. By cycling through colors one begins to see the ocean of waves resulted from the combined activities of all the participants. However we need to keep track of different channels by change of color. This ocean of waves has nodal points where the various cycles line up. This is the basic idea behind monitoring the tri-pane of daily, 30min and 5min or some variation thereof. When each are increasing volume in the direction of price, a nodal point is present and most likely an increase in pace is/will occur within the bar. The part that mess people up is shifting from EOB monitoring and then dropping intrabar when trading without having the tool of PRV in place.

    If volume isn't giving enough information on one's fractal one needs to go the next aggregate timeframe. However when doing this one always notes that liquidity in decreasing and therefore on the lookout for a surge of volatility to arrive. PRV shows this before EOB.

    The basic aesthetic is to increase clarity with annotations and not have any unnecessary lines that aren't relevant to present price action. (They might become relevant in the future as it comes into now)

    Thank you for posting your work.

    I miscommunicated, more like this:


    This next piece is difficult for many to grasp - that this next possibility exists.

    We are identifying trend segments that are profit opportunities. This is the standard we are building our minds to allow us to perceive in realtime. We are creating a space in our minds to perceive what comes before a two-bar combo and what comes after. Trends migrate with each successive bar as recycling two bar combos and in the case of laterals, multi-bar combos.

    We are cruising through a bunch of concepts, super great! We are taking a high-altitude view, what is unsaid, is that to embody these concepts into the unconscious requires the drills to be done by hand. Hand drawn is better than programming for now.

    For all programming is limited by the consciousness of the programmer's own understanding of concepts.

    We want to build a sense of muscle memory, so in real time with money on the line, one doesn't stop breathing and get stupidified by the jiggle jiggle of PA.
    Like a high-performance athlete, repetition is key. The drills (if done over and over) will get stored into one's LTM and served up at the right moment as "Knowing that you know."

    A milestone is to annotate 50 charts in the manner we have described so far as well as keeping a log of questions that naturally arise as one applies the concepts to particular situations.

    That can happen simultaneously as we progress the conversation but know that is where the real work lies waiting.
  11. Ok, I'm happy to share and learn. Coming up with hypothesis and ideas is easy, not so validating them generally.

    Here's my next attempt, hoping I get the colour right (from volume bar, close-open?):
    Yes, you can't program anything unless you know what to program, so first you need to program your mind.

    Not sure what to find before and after two-bar combos. If it is XB/XR, there's usually some peak or trough associated with it. Maybe easier to read with these lines and should they be adjusted according to volume somehow?
  12. Comments within quoted text
  13. I've put on laterals here without the yellow (NB. 7th Jun seems not to be inside bar):


    For below chart:

    Thanks for the correction. I believe I'm confused exactly what is meant by "long" and "short" in the text below, and how to interpret Non-Dominant Traverse bar for bar. Where/how to look to discern which direction is Non-Dominant (aka anti-Dominance), bar for bar, with certainty in order to draw Non-Dominant Traverse objectively? Can bar #2 in relation with bar #1, ie. using 10-case model be used, except for SYM, Hitch and OB?

    Inverted D/nD analysis 20-21 Jun below (dominant traverse is short), is this correct?
    Is it correct that colour of Dominant Traversal always be black when long, and red when short?

  14. Comment with quote.

    You've got it. So in any two bar comparison, let's use XR and XB - these two bars define a directional 2 bar trend. We connect the extremes of these two bar points. This is the Dominant Price direction. The smaller traverse of this 2 bar trend is the non-Dominant Price direction.

    As you can see, multi-bar sequences form a trend segment. A trend segment connects larger trends. For example from the 9 to the 17 would be a either one trade on the larger fractal or 3 trades on the faster fractals of three trend segments. PA traders use large stops to accommodate this operation of the market.

    Every trend regardless of fractal size from intra-bar legs to multi-day bars is defined by three moves.

    Dominant -> non-Dominant -> return to Dominant

    Just before the first move of the current trend is the 3rd move of the prior trend. Since trends interlock and oscillate. This might not be seen right away. It's ok. We look for Dominance.

    We are always on the lookout for Dominance.
    We know that what comes before is non-Dominance.

    Now with the Laterals, notice when the laterals end with a BO as well as the price form for the FBO of the lateral boundaries. We are focusing on the close of bar now. The close can either happen within a pre-defined and annotated lateral boundary, on the line, or crosses over the line.

    Each gives us an indication of what must next, dependent of what volume is presenting.

    A Lateral comes into existence when the H's and L's of Bar.0 AND Bar.1 is within or equal to the H and L of Bar.2
    This is the third bar of the lateral. Each successive bar gets a label of it's bar count. For example the next bar on the example above is 4, then 5, 6,7, etc.

    The BO of the lateral occurs on the bar that closes outside the lateral boundary. However this break could and frequently fails. When two successive bars close outside the lateral boundary, the lateral has served it's purpose.

    Laterals can contain laterals.

    The zigzag exercise is not an annotation one would do for trading. It's more to create a mental space and image in one's mind of where the greatest and lowest risk profit making opportunities exist.

    It also leads us to start looking at volume to distinguish Dominance in real time.
  15. Ah, I see. Yes, Laterals / SYM are non-dominant moves, so mark as "breathers" between dominance.

    Completing and fixing up chart below:

  16. Thank you for correcting and filling in the chart.

    Now we are focusing in on the turns. We can know we have a turn by three visual cues.

    One is geometrically easy to identify such a a single bar spike and change of direction.

    Another is in the grid of 5x5 where as one builds each bar by following the legs in the mind's eye where a Dominant shift occurred by the sequence of legs, leg direction and/or absence of 1st/3rd leg.

    The third has more to do with space than form. The space being an FTT within the parallelogram.

    Each will signal at different moments as a bar is built or by the resulting form (and comparison) of the bar thereafter.

    First let's define an A turn. This is one where the Dominance is shifting to non-Dominance. B turn is the shift from non-Dom to Dom. C turn is where the previous Dominance is no longer and the Dominance has shifted into a new dominant direction.
    Dominance to Dominance.
    Rapid change of sentiment.

    How we know this is that we have Increasing Volume. Whenever there is increasing volume we have Dominance.

    How we contextualize it makes all the difference.

    To see this clearer, we have to intentionally make a mistake.
    With all the increasing volume bars, annotate the associate price bar with an arrow and the text

    This is a Dominant Turn. Not all these turns will be C turns, some will be B turns.
    Which ones?
  17. So is every increasing volume bar either a B or C-turn?

    I'm guessing B are bars that are more "choppy" in relation to previous bar, rather than a clean turn.
    Ie. 16 Mar below is more of a continuation after a lower fractal flag (faster "chop") on 15 Mar was broken the day after.

    You can get an idea by following price movement from previous bar to the current bar and see how the two bars relate regarding chop -> movement or movement -> reverse-movement

    Though it would be good to have clear guidelines what is what, ie. in relation with 5x5 grid and/or 10-cases, which should be doable (but need more clarity on this concept first).

    I need to do this annotation simple like so (with C-mistakes):

  18. The turn that comes after the C turn is the


    It's always has decr Volume.

    Then the turn that is a return to Dominance which has incr V. (If it's still in the trend started by the C before the A.)

    (You'll have to relabel some of the C's.)

    It's useful to have the text descriptor below the turn ID. That's why to use a line or arrow for spacing.

    If you do this on the previous zigzag chart, some things will start to become clearer(although messy).
  19. Ok, let me see if I got the sequence right.
    • A D-nD is always on decreasing volume
    • B nD-D comes after A, always on increasing volume
    • C D-D comes after B or C, always on increasing volume

    Ignoring the first 2 bars since 1st bar volume delta is unknown, can this categorization below be correct?


    If so, it seems A marks non-DOM periods, B marks start of return to dominance and C marks dominance. You can then easily identify the volume sequence in relationship with price-chart and annotations. I've colour-coded this above to make it even easier to read.
  20. Bars 19, 24, 30, 13, 15, 20, 26
    Require revisiting for correct ID.

    Once you have turn ID, it's like a price lateral - it defines the following bar's until change. In other words drop any repeating letters after it first makes it's presence known.

    30 is a special case, an exception to the rule. We get insight on this via the 2-legged bar on our 5x5. Unseen dominance within the shadow of the prior bar.

    C can arrive at any time. It is change. Whether that change lasts a bar or several it matters not. We now know a signal of change via the work done to build the mind.
    There is more for we are working to build a system based on a complete dataset.

    Distinguishing this one adds another block in our foundation of understanding the market's system of operation.
  21. From where do you count these bars, not sure which bars or what about them need revisiting?

    I've removed the repeating letters here:


    Is bar 30 19th of Jun? So it's dominant even though on lesser volume?
  22. May
    Also revist une 15th
    Making changes will influence other turn ID's.
    Confirm by drawing channels that bound these now emerging defined trends.
    C is your pt1, B is your pt3. If a B repeats adjust your channel pt3.
    Sometimes due to geometry turn A will be the pt3.
    As one zooms into the legs of a bar, it becomes clear why.
  23. I've attempted below and I see you can connect C's with B's, though doesn't seem to make sense always. Is this why you want to remove some B's?

  24. Revisit May 19, 24, 29, 30, June 13, 15, 20, 22, etc,..
    When the ID is accurate, clarity follows. A misID has repercussions of confusion. When confusion arises, go back to a "last known good". In other words back to the spot where "you know that you know."

    There are some bars that illustrate "the exception". To point that out now could be confusing. Although, the concepts presented thus far would give you the necessary insight to discern these bars.

    C turn can come at any time. It doesn't change the fact that on the prior bar there could have been a C. However it does change the perception of whether a Dominance shift occurred.

    May 8, Dominance Short presented itself, May 12 is the early perception (from the XO of the rtl short tape FTT - only two bar in length (8,9)).

    May 13 shows Dominance Volume arriving to support the BO from what we now perceive as the non-Dom traverse returning to a larger Dominance context as an increased pace tape (new long traverse) resulting in a VE of the larger channel.

    Tapes build traverses, traverses builds channels, channels can become traverses in larger channels.

    Once you get the correct turn ID's the four trends of turns will reveal themselves.

    This extends and expands our understanding of trends and trendlines.

    Having the "Pattern" image, posted previously on this thread or the one prior in front of you will support this understanding.
  25. Thanks for explanations!

    Going out for a day-trip. I got this far:


    On "The Pattern", what is FRY (right of "DU")?
    Is that failing to manifest in blue traverse above?
  26. New version, trying to align all this with P and DU:


    Putting on a channel:

  27. Good work.
    Do the following for increased accuracy.
    ID these turns
    Add May 8, 9, 19
    that doesn't change any ID's
    Add 22, 24, changes 29
    Add June 13, changes 14
    Add 20, changes 21
    Chg 26, Jul1

    You are beginning to use color convention for OOE matching channels - good. By matching the channel color to it's respective pt1, pt2, pt3, etc, will support clarity.

    On any given fractal construction.
    FTT always comes after a pt3. VE's can come after pt3. Once a VE then either another VE (price pushing the LTL out forming a larger fractal container) or an FTT, (in some cases a VE is also an FTT) as price in heading for the RTL. The BO is always the bar with the close and subsequent bar closes crossing over the RTL defined by the pt1 and pt3 (in this fractal container).
    Always start with FFF (faster fractal first).

    As one builds bottom up from two bar comparisons, tapes get built. A series of two bar combinations in a directional movement builds a traverse. A traverse defines the bounds of a forming Channel. Current traverses can expand the bounds of a previous channel. New channels come into view geometrically. Their context submits to the current Price Action and whether RTL's are respected with FBO (new pt3) or their RTL's are crossed over (BO) thereby forming a new channel in the opposite direction. Within a channel, increasing volume can come at any time. If this volume is in harmony with the current directional context then it is a B-turn. If this volume is in opposition with the current directional context then it is a C-turn. Dominance can come at any time. We look to see if this new dominance is Continue (B-turn) or Change (C-turn). The very next bar could be increased volume but again a opposite direction of the previous bar. We are at Change again (C-turn). The next bar could be Incr volume arriving in the opposite direction again. We are at Change again (C-turn). The A and B turn are always in the context of the prior C. If the contexts are not lining up then a Turn ID was missed.

    The operating order of events is a fractal. This fractal gets bound by a larger fractal (traverse) with it's own OOE. This fractal (now traverse) gets bound by a larger fractal (channel). Each have their pt1, pt2, pt3, VE's, FTT's, etc.

    Turns operated within the above context but are limited to the bars where the above it true. Turns give a heads-up that an event has happened. Where that event is in the OOE, gives a heads-up on what to anticipate.

    For either of the two opposing scenarios to unfold, we anticipate seeing the necessary change in volume. Volume is the independent variable, price is the dependent variable.

    Once the turn ID's are accurate, one will be able to trace the movements of price and volume on a bar by bar basis and come to understand three things with greater accuracy.

    What came before?
    What is happening now?
    What must come next?

    The "must" is influenced by one's bias. We are cultivating a neutral bias and receive the market's full dataset by which to make our context determination. We always have two simultaneous narratives. The two "musts" - one reveals it's dominance over the other by observing bar-by-bar both price and volume.

    There are moments where both narratives are true, like the Sym. Drawing contextual lines to define lateral boundaries shows us the moment where price starts to translate again but only if supporting volume arrives else price heads in the opposite direction to create more business by affecting the current market participants perception of value. Volume must increase for a BO. If price BO's of this lateral unsupported by an Incr in Volume, either this volume will arrive on the next series of bars or the BO will fail.

    This method is exact in it's application.

    FRV is first rising volume. It is a term used in the context of Jack Hershey's Position Vector Trading in the archives. In that method he distinguishes and defines dry up and FRV. One can achieve a higher degree of understanding, freedom and facility by applying Jack's perspective of market operation. He describes the Seven Doublings of Capital and what is necessary to achieve it the first time.
    He also introduced SCT, (seamless continuous trading) as a hold and reversal trading concept that could be applied to faster and faster time frames.

    His method for trading multiple streams of equities in a timely manner results in a generously positive equity curve.

    He is a true master. The process by which transference is possible is the process by which you are engaged by actively doing work through MADA.

    We are getting you up to speed by which you can perform MADA with tools that through practice and application will build your mind.

    When I first came across his writings, I didn't understand most of them. I had to explore the threads by Spydertrader. His translation was easier for me to understand. They both have very deep understandings of market structure, operation and how to consistently profit thereby. Both are master teachers in their own standing and have certainly made a world shifting influence on this trader's experience of the markets and how to participate with logic and an informed pov built on self determination.

    Spydertrader's posted charts are an invaluable resource in firmly grounding the concepts we are currently working with. Jack's older material prior to 2012 is the basis for this current work process. Jack's final work is something I'm currently working to achieve a deeper understanding of. It requires a firm grasp of all his prior work, at least in my case.

    Logging is the crux. There are insights derived from bar-to-bar logging that can't be received anywhere else. One can start at any time, sooner than later is best. Logging supports one's focus. Debriefing with the annotated chart and log provides the fastest path for progress.

    This method is also the path least traveled. Even though overgrown, the path is still here where each step taken reveals the next.
  28. Much appreciated! I've tried to ID the bars you mention and also follow the logic in the previous post to ID C, B and A's below. Please note bars from 20 Jun onwards for some sub-bar IDs and also colour-coded Cs and Bs as they seem to be directional:

  29. That chart looks like it was a group project at a mental hospital.
  30. Starting from left to right,
    Bar 5 is a C or B, we do not know in this pane of data. We start with C since it's the first show of dominance. Bar 8 is decr vol but still within the our first channel of the day. This is a non-Dom bar. Bar 9 we have incr vol but it is the opposite of bar 5. This is C turn. This bar also XO the RTL
    Everything is accurate until Bar 22. That is an A-Turn of the C turn on the prior bar 19. Bar 23 has decr vol so we are still in the effect of the A-turn. Bar 24 has incr vol but in the opposite direction as Bar 19's ID of C-turn. It's also the bar that breaks through the lower lateral boundary set at Bar 19. Bar 29 is a continuation of this C-turn on the prior bar. It doesn't get labeled because it's incr Vol just like the bar prior so it's part of the same move.
    Bar 30 and 31 are an exception. Bar 30 doesn't have incr Vol compared to Bar 29 but it does have almost equal. Where have we seen this form before? On the 5x5 grid, the 2 legged bars. 1st and 3rd legs could be missing, 2nd leg always dominant. This (implicit) dominant shift cannot be readily seen by anyone who has not done the 5x5 colored leg drill.
    The confirmation comes at Bar 31. Even though it's decr vol, the price bar has XO the RTL of the larger short channel we just completed. We are seeing the first sign of a BO. June 2nd Bar shows ever so increasing Black volume, same with bar7. Bar 8 is the attempt at the larger short channel to reassert itself with a surge of Red volume. We don't know until bar12.
    Even though it's decr vol, the price increased and XO the most recent tapes RTL. Bar 13 is where everyone sees the BO of the lateral and the VE of the traverse. We don't know what type yet. Bar 14 and 15 see a resurgence of Red Volume, This is the pt 3 of the even larger short channel. This is proven by price following the RTL of this channel until it XO at Jul 1. Price action on this trendline would have moved to the LTL if Red Volume began increasing to the level that we saw in the first week of May. Since no, we know that this Short Channel is ending and a New Long Channel will start. This new long could be another non-Dom traverse.
    We'll know by watching volume.

    Bars June 21 on require reworking to the logic above.

    The notation for the OOE's is different that the notation for the turns. It uses similar logic but focuses on a different aspect.
    Annotating turns involves a granularity of focus. Turns put together do have a sequence. The sequence of turns brings into view the 4 set of turn trends. Turn trends start and stop on C's. The C's would be included.
    C-C is the first.

    What are the others?

    The different colors you are utilizing are creating more clarity for the traverses, good.
    Also, BO's are by convention labelled near the TL and bar where the BO occurred.
  31. TT's:
    1. CC
    2. CAC
    3. CABABC
    4. CABABAC

    Latest update:
  32. Good work. The first three are accurate. Your fourth answer brings another concept into view. It's that trends can be interrupted at any time. In this example, answer 3 is the fourth turn trend. It is that of the Drift Trend. The drift trend can cycle through A and B turns until a point that they don't. This is the overbought and oversold regions of the stoch. These zones are associated with accumulation and distribution in popular terms. The third type of Turn Trend has not presented itself in this PV chart.

    Bar 26, 29 need revisiting.

    Now that we have most of the Turn ID's, start to look at Turn ID's in what came before, the current turn and if that was the current bar, what were the likely Turn ID's that must come next? Look at the zigzag trend segments, look at pace and slope of the 1st dominant traverse after a BO of the prior trend. What helps is to trace price as a bar is build from 3 legs.
    Notice how the 1st leg of any of the 3-leg bars always entices a trader to enter. It's our Sym. Through the creation of multiple containers of context, we have a robust backdrop by which to make an informed decision. A lot of times, that decision is to wait. Hold if we are on the right side of the market and no signals of change. Reverse if we see a signal for change that builds a congruent dataset that we sweep. Sideline if it gets confusing. Enter when we see directional movement with incr vol. Exit during the tail end of the directional movement when vol pace decreases.

    It's premature to get into the trading aspect of it, just a seed for future discussion.

    This will bring up the next area we will clarify - high volatility PA in building a bar vs the path of least resistance.
  33. Like 26 Jun, like an intrabar "SYM" / consolidation?
    Is the last (AB)-sequence interrupted?


    Following the flow, there's abrupt C-reversals o_O, B-trend boosting :strong: (sometimes sputtering engine) and lots of A-drifting :confused:

  34. I don't readily see a EOB Sym in the price case on that Bar.

    May 9th the Short channel was interrupted at bar 19. If that was red volume, then it would have been a B-turn. The B-turn would have completed the smallest drift trend C-(A-B)-(A-B)-C.
    Drift trends can go on cycling C-(A-B)-(A-B)-(A-B),..etc. Not too long though before volatility arrives with a C-turn interruption. There is a typical drift trend from the 30th to the 8th; C-(A-B)-(A-B)-C

    Volatility arrives in 4 C-A-C turn trends as the tug-of-war of dominance plays out with BO at Jul 1.

    On a larger fractal we can see C-A-C are turns themselves. Dominance one way then dominance the other just like


    The major takeaway is viewing tapes, traverses, channels, turns and trends as composed of Dominant move -> to non-Dominant move -> return to Dominant move.

    We know what's what by measuring Volume.

    By annotating 50 charts in this manner, your facility will improve as well as recognizing changes at the Hard Right Edge which is getting us to RTH.

    The annotations that are a specialized are the zigzag drills. They are not necessarily annotated in real time once one can see the "space" in the minds eye.

    We have defined 2 of the 4 primary characteristics of volume.

    What would the other two be?
  35. If we zoom in on 26 Jun bar as an idealization:
    It's short-lived, maybe 2/3 of a bar (sub-bar) or less and small, but does resemble a SYM. It's a very symmetrical doji at least, so could have similar characteristics but weaker in the higher fractal / timeframe:


    Or maybe it is not symmetrical enough? If open and close were closer to vertical center?

    Peaking (topping) and Troughs (bottoming)?
  36. You got it. The example you provided is what can be discerned when one shifts from a traditional up/down vertical orientation of PA to one that is horizontal.

    We see it as aggregate time-scaling where a 15min bar is 3 x 5min, etc.

    However we are creating a different type of display through annotating and logging.

    If you take a copy of your 5x5 rectangular grid and do as you did above tracing the path of least resistance to build the final representation of a bar. You'll notice price passes through the doji on all 3 legged bars.
    (You'd make a trace drawing next to the bar depicted in the 5x5)
    Take another copy and if you take the path of greatest volatility, price will pass through and present doji's multiple times.

    As one drills down in timeframes this can be seen ie. 30min encapsulates 6 x 5min bars, etc.

    However what one is building is a recognition on the current bar of one's trading fractal whether there is greater movements of bi-directional influence or if the bar itself trends as the bar is built.

    There is a region of bars where this will happen more than the others on the 5x5.

    Essentially this is the critical line of support/resistance that shows sentiment. When annotating channels, one comes across another concept coming into view - Congestion, Convergence, Centering (CCC). It's the zone where two opposing channel RTL are forming a forest sized Sym.

    As the channels are being annotated, by waiting for a resurgence of dominance, there comes a point where any pt3 will XO the horizontal, sentiment has shifted on the larger timeframe.

    This is simpler then is sounds. Look at the 3-legged bar. One could draw a RTL as price reaches for it's high and low within this bar. The slope changes as this happens and shifts from long to short or short to long. This is the reasoning behind the insight all 2nd legs are the dominant leg.

    To note, I am describing 5min bars. The chart you are working with are Daily bars. The principals are the same.
  37. The four primary elements of volume leads us to the "Pattern"

    The "idealized" pattern is b2b2r2b for long and r2r2b2r for short.

    Let's go on a hike. We are hiking up the peaks and troughs of volume.

    We'll work with the first one. For the start of a Dominant long, as we annotate and log, we will see decr black volume with incr price (b2b2r2b) This is price still within the boundaries of the prior short channel. We have just logged an FTT (which frequently becomes the pt1 of the new opposing channel).
    This is the trough on the volume histogram. When price XO the RTL, if Dominant long is true, then incr black volume with incr price will come to the market (b2b2r2b).

    This incr in volume will peak at some point. On smaller timeframes this lines up with the bar. On larger timeframes the peaking of price is offset from the peaking of volume. Volume peaks come first in this context. This is also the pt2 of our price channel. As volume decr, then we are in a non-Dom move (b2b2r2b) If Dominant long is true on this larger channel fractal, price will decr. At some point (pt3) this changes and the previous dominant price direction will resume with incr vol (b2b2r2b). This is move 3 - a return to dominance. From pt3, if incr vol (in comparison to the prior segment of incr vol), then price will form a VE. If the incr vol is not at the same pace as the prior segment then an FTT will present itself in price action.

    The symmetry is true for r2r2b2r.

    Start with a fresh chart. Use the distinctions you've created so far, annotate and post it.
  38. I've a fresh chart here with some space to focus:

    [(UPDATED again to fix some color errors)

  39. In your charting software you should have the ability to change where the current bar is being built. You want open space in the future of price action.

    Also we want to start drawing all the price cases. Your should be able to fill within two parallel lines. Light yellow for laterals, ftp, fbp, syms and hitches. Violet for stb, str. Blue for OB.
  40. This is just a screenshot from a website called BigCharts, and they don't provide that option unfortunately. I'm not sure exactly what is required yet for this methodology of annotation, but will something like this suffice just for now (created extra space to the right)?


    I know this is low-tech, but would rather keep complexities and limitations of tech out of the way just for now if possible.

    Meanwhile I'll look into setting up NT, although I don't have access to download data for this particular instrument anymore, or the same data at least if I find a workaround for that, so might be different data and time spent for this particular setup.
  41. That's perfect. Just extend your trendlines out from other the short and long side. That will give you context on the open, the dominant leg, the close, the slope and direction of the tape. With this existing bar draw a lateral. Price has to close beyond this boundary on increasing volume to take the trade. High volatility trend segment, reversals bar by bar to intrabar. Depends on the doji. In reality we need to be on the DOM with T&S to trade intrabar.
    Equites are a bit difficult in that they gap frequently. It requires HRE mental on the open de-gapping. That's a workout.
    Now if you draw your tapes, they give leading indication,...
  42. dk_pndora_eod_2017_7_7_e.png

    XB/XR are stochastic movements between yellow constipation, violet revulsion and the occational expansion of blueness in any direction. :)

    Avoided adding extra lines as it'll just make it harder to make, read and maintain.
  43. Yes.
    If you make them more transparent to balance everything else.
    Annotate the Peaks of Volume.

    The short to extend is the one that recycles Bar9 pt1 and the current bar high. Now you have zones for the next day's bar. The open sets your pt1, chill until the close. Where it is in the zones in relation to the previous bar against the background of current volume will be very clear. With timely action tape these highs and lows as the pt3's for your first trend of the day, volume will be logged. The Price case is identified, turns are ID'd. We begin to annotate volume.

    Unless dominant volume arrives to extend VE.
    With the presence of the OB the anticipated price action is a A-turn inside bar, either sym, ftp, fbp or hitch, starting a non-Dom traverse back to the RTL. At any moment this A-turn could turn to C turn with the rise of short volume.

    When Price Action XO the establish green RTL with an Increase in short volume, sentiment will have changed. We'd then be on the Dominant traverse of the new short channel bounds being expanded by this dominant traverse. Increased volume pace equals lower risk due to the momentum of the directional movement. Like all things it has an inertia.

    The opposite is true on long channel symmetry.

    Otherwise we are on the lookout for dominant volume returning in the form of a FBO as price bounces off the RTL. (B-Turn).

    Since you are monitoring the day, the next timeframe that would be useful is the 30min.
    With 6 - 30min blocks, we can see in the first 1/2 of the day whether the volume pace will be incr or decr volume compared to the prorated bar volume - PRV.

    Otherwise, to go up a trading fractal to trading weeklies. The dailies then become your faster fractal to carve turns within.

    The PRV tool is the invention of the honorable Jack Hershey. Simple and Insightful for traders who trade 5min bars.

    For EOD traders, it would be useful to introduce the scoring system used by Jack.

    It is a binary vector system.
    +Price is 1,
    -price is 0,
    +Vol is 1,
    -Vol is 0,
    +A/D is 1,
    -A/D is 0.

    It's a way to contextualize the high's and low's of a stock price cycle as a repeating sine wave. The three variables permutations gives 8 values, a cycle of stock price migrating in a sequential fashion 7 to 0.

    However to go down that road at this moment is premature. We can return to that topic. It's better to ground the principals introduced thus far. It's easy to forget one of the pieces. That gives and incorrect result. One can always tell, for the thoughts of confusion cloud clarity, confidence, support and comfort leave for the next party while fear and anxiety decide to crash and stay way longer than welcomed.

    Just stop, take a breath, go back over one's work and look for alternatives in context that would have been missed. Debriefing is the place where one makes their money. When the markets are open is when we get paid. The earned insights by building and supporting one own mastery in the markets is an ever expanding endeavor. Do thorough and complete work.

    The market is orderly and migrates in an anticipatory manner. Much to their protest, any contradictory thoughts are held by the players of the losing hand. Their approach to the markets is based on an incomplete dataset.
  44. My current TF is EOD-bars setting triggers after close, so more familiar with daily bars and up, though would want to someday do faster TFs I'm not setup for that now. If it's not too complicating though, could make a shot at it (curious), as I believe BigCharts can provide faster TF charts, and it'd continue to be decoupled from my other setup.

    Annotations beginning with identifying peaks from a neutral standpoint:

  45. Peaks and troughs are identified by the comparison to the previous bar.

    With the annotation theme you have with the volume bars, if you color the volume annotation to match the volume bar, simplicity arises. ie black peak P, red peak R, same with troughs. Each volume bar would be a Peak or Trough. The convention is to use tiny sloped lines above the bar to showing increasing volume.

    Also draw your potential larger short channel by recycling pt1 and using Jul 7 High as the new pt3.

    The caveat is that this method works in any market, any timeframe provided that sufficient liquidity exists.

    For equities, they need to be screened by a specific criteria. Otherwise noise is introduced where none need exist.

    Since we didn't start at screening for High Quality stocks, we'll frame this as an exercise and drill. The screen is the first & essential step in risk management. By using the tools outlined so far, we create a backdrop of context by which to evaluate current Price Action.

    Based on the annotations you have built so far, there are multiple scenarios that can happen on the next bar. We are looking for Continue and for Change.

    Here are the four possibilites:
    If volume is increasing AND price is increasing, anticipate ____
    If volume is increasing AND price is decreasing, anticipate _____
    If volume is decreasing AND price is increasing, anticipate ____
    If volume is decreasing AND price is decreasing, anticipate ____

    also, the other way

    If price is increasing AND volume is increasing, anticipate ____
    If price is increasing AND volume is decreasing, anticipate ____
    If price is decreasing AND volume is increasing, anticipate ____
    If price is decreasing AND volume is decreasing, anticipate ____

  46. If volume is increasing AND price is increasing, anticipate ____Continue
    If volume is increasing AND price is decreasing, anticipate _____Change
    If volume is decreasing AND price is increasing, anticipate ____Change

    If volume is decreasing AND price is decreasing, anticipate ____Continue

    also, the other way

    If price is increasing AND volume is increasing, anticipate ____Continue
    If price is increasing AND volume is decreasing, anticipate ____Change
    If price is decreasing AND volume is increasing, anticipate ____Change
    If price is decreasing AND volume is decreasing, anticipate ____Continue

    Re-arranged to a matrix of knows and unknowns to aid inductive reasoning:

  47. Two of the four are correct.
    Two of the next set are correct.

    Build on what you know, as you work the logic out.

    Shifting focus;

    The first r2r, we only see 2r in this chart, bar 8,9. The next short bar 11,15,16,... etc.

    The first b2b, bar 18,19. Then the 24th where the trend would have continued with incr long volume. Instead, the bears showed up, or just no buyers.

    The b2b happened on bar 30, 31. It's inverted because some say that's how large orders get absorbed across bars when the order/s spans multiple bars to fill, etc. I don't really know. I just know from experience what I see as the EOB artifact isn't necessary the accurate representation of the OOE. Insight comes from observing exactly how the bar was built.

    Bar 31 is the pt2 of the green. Bar 29 was the FTT of the first short channel that came into view on this chart. Which is also the pt2 of the larger short channel with pt3 at bar14.

    b2b and r2r are always there as the dominant shift from decr vol to incr vol in the continued price direction. Whether the trend completes itself or is interrupted by resurgence of dominance in the opposite price direction.

    You are building to have an informed opinion based on the granularity of the market system of operation. Form an anticipatory text of what you think the next bar will do based on observable measures of volume as that bar is built. Based on the possibilities, There is a momentary doji on every bar.

    Where then can price go from this pivot point? What do you need to see in volume for this to be true?

    The market works on negative logic.


  48. dk_pndora_eod_2017_7_7_j.png
    Inversion hides true PV-pressure direction. Trends within opposing trends take turns at being non-DOM. The closer to HRE and left edge the less certainty.

    • latest OB -> next bar A-Turn, IB and less volatility, possible traversal to RTL in next or forthcoming bars
    • latest 2 VE's on increased volume -> increasing strength upwards, need close above latest VB/possible Latteral for confirmation of direction
    • possible latest 2b with rising volume -> strength, OB support to hold, larger BO to upside, 7 Jul or OB-RTL to form an accelerated P3
    • if possible 2r next bar -> IB, return of some negativity, possible BO of RTL
    • if close below OB -> FTT negating VEs but may still be within RTL
    • if close below RTL -> PBO, short-term resumption of bearishness below OB
    • overall increasing black volume within latest green Traversal -> overall increase of volatility

    Next bar:
    Anticipating 2r next bar, which could close below latest close, below pivot.
    If on low PRV = strength, less chance for new P3 forming
    If on high PRV = uncertain, rising red volume

    While close above pivot and increasing PRV = long
    While close below pivot or decreasing PRV = start looking for exits
  49. If volume is increasing AND price is increasing => anticipate Continue
    If volume is increasing AND price is decreasing => anticipate Change
    If volume is decreasing AND price is increasing => anticipate Continue
    If volume is decreasing AND price is decreasing => anticipate Change
    If price is increasing AND volume is increasing => anticipate Continue
    If price is increasing AND volume is decreasing => anticipate Continue
    If price is decreasing AND volume is increasing => anticipate Change
    If price is decreasing AND volume is decreasing => anticipate Change
  50. Well done!

    Order the list in sequence of possibilities, two sort orders. One with the volume measure as the first column. The other as the price case as the first column. When the bar builds notice how the bar built, which came first the High or Low, what was volume when that happened? What did volume and price do from this point?

    As the bar builds, the possibilities exclude themselves, the forks come and go, as we arrive to a sense of knowing as there is the only possibility that has now actualized in front of you. This gives a fresh datapoint to add to our dataset. Our job is to listen and see, what came before, what's happening now and what must come next -WMCN.

    The last green traverse that you added create the context by which accelerating pace will still be true, (if price is bound by the rtl and pushes the VE out). Good thinking.

    Anticipating is a very different process and experience than predicting. One stays dynamic and operates in the now. The other excludes all the possibilities that are happening now, instead only looking to confirm one.

    The preparations for each operate from different paradigms.

    So now we have an idea of each possibility, what will the trend (tape, traverse, channel) do if that particular case was true?

    Once true, when non true?

    The recent list you posted is still half true. It's important to work this out for yourself.
  51. If we start with the beginning of the bar it's the Open. There are several possibilities. These are some main ones for this context:


    a) High volume BO in-line with higher black volume in trend, could go long though still early in bar (aggressive).
    b) High volume above previous close, but no BO yet, wait for confirmation.
    c) High volume but still inside OB, wait.
    d) High volume BO below OB, anticipate Change or at least long not interesting any longer.
    e) High volume BO below RTL, strongly anticipate Change and start considering reversal.
    f) Low volume BO. Less attractive than a) but could still go long, expecting some continuation (aggressive / chasing the market).
    g) No BO yet, wait.
    h) No BO yet, wait.
    i) BO below OB on low volume, anticipate short-term limited upside.
    j) BO below RTL on low volume, anticipate FBO or BO and forget longs for a while.

    Of these, none are particularly interesting at Open since we should wait for more data, but if aggressive (ie. high quality pick) could go long in a) or f).

    I think this should cover Open. Interesting cases to look further at is a) - c) and f) - h). They can each have High First or Low First, so will be at least 12 more cases, maybe more. d), e), i) and j) may be pruned out of further long-analysis.

    If this helps, I can continue with the interesting cases and High First or Low First, or if you have concrete suggestions I can attempt to incorporate them, though I'm not exactly sure how to now.

    EDIT: Maybe b) and c) can be merged together, as well as g) and h) as they're very similar?

    Also, maybe d)-e) and i)-j) not too bad depending on further price development, according to possible new channel forming, so shouldn't be pruned after all? Seems to be many possibilities.

  52. This is a good segway into failsafes. Failsafes are in an ordinance context. A way to handle a worst case is a off read of off time,.. out of sync,..phase,.. vibration,, etc,..

    The most recent bar gives us these failsafes. The first is our lateral boundaries. The boundary that defines IB or OB is the first indication of context. We are in our small diamond form within the geometry of the 10 price cases.

    If the open is outside this boundary then we know that four cases are eliminated. We look at volume and the direction of the first leg. There will be a moment (or not) the close comes before the 2nd or 3rd leg. We advance one peak to define the current bar as a single bar leg with a missing 1st and 3rd leg. This makes more sense when you look at what came before, the rtl, the context we have created.

    Failsafe. If our position is opposite the right side of the market. The failsafe is the hardline of the stoploss. Our risk management has very low tolerance for the reduction of capital. If we missed identified the entry, we are in a state of unknowing.
    We act in knowing. This loss is the smallest loss possible per unit of time.
    Accept this and reset.
    As one's skilis increase reversing comes into view.

    As one advances the BO of the RTL is always viewed as changes in sentiment. This is where the early birds hang out. Other early birds hang out at the FTT's. Others hang out at the prior turn as an early early bird. It gets darkest before the dawn for them.

    Changes in sentiment occur on all timeframes and multiple fractals within those timeframes.

    Advanced experts use this knowledge as wind in the sails,...
  53. Imagine the open cases you identified as closes.

    On two images, draw a bar each way.

    What is the context now?

    Where does price want to go now?

    What must volume do for this to be true?

    On case a)
    Price incr, vol incr, open above our lateral bookmark.

    This is Continue

    The correct symmetry is true.

    Enter market long, draw RTL from L.1 pt1 to L.0 pt3 (as the current low of building bar. )

    Exit/reverse when a close XO this RTL produced by a two bar high volatility move. Anywhere from 1 to 4 bars in typical length.

    Reset Lateral Bookmarks and possible RTL's, repeat.
  54. Still, just for educational purposes, not trading this.

    Stock is falling directly from Open, so would be a good day for long if stock going to ie. 680 (Open at 679):


    Rough look at longer view has some promise of upside BO as well (but this is not QC'ed and says nothing about probability):
  55. Yes, we are building.

    The idea of MADA is to ground every bar (on your trading timeframe) through the process that ultimately requires an action. The most frequent action is hold (continue) in between signals of change. It's important to complete the loop. Since we are monitoring EOB. Then at the EOB, after sweeping our dataset, we have a conclusion. This is the conclusion we test with the market. The market is our teacher and is always right. If our conclusion was false, then we debrief as we are sidelined. We only enter on knowing. We sideline or exit when our understanding isn't in alignment with price action. Money is a by-product of understanding. To set up a system any other way is like receiving random rewards de-coupled from any causal variable within our control. Hence, the uncontrollable outbursts of rage, anger, frustration, fear, anxiety, etc..
    We are cultivating a better and more productive state of being when participating in the markets.

    On the first chart, the opening bar was an OB. This set the stage for a lateral. We draw our lateral boundary. As soon as the current close extended past the lateral boundary, this was a short trend segment presenting itself. The first short trend segment was over when price XO the rtl drawn on the high of the previous bar as point one and the high of the current bar as the pt3.

    The fourth or fifth bar set a new pt3 for the short channel underway. We observed the Dominant and non-Dominant traverse of this short channel up to this point.

    In a situation like this, when drawing a new channel coming into view, sometimes it's better to recycle the pt3 as opposed to the pt1.
  56. It looks like you have the ability to go to a faster timeframe than the Daily. If so, pull up the 30min. This will give you an idea whether the volume pace is in line to become a peak or a trough volume notation for the day.
  57. It's already after close here (after 17). This is 15 min, don't have option for 30 mins. It's T-day:


    Unfortunately EOD is scaled differently so won't go well with working chart:


    So will need another solution if to follow this bar by bar in future.
  58. That's ok.
    We have plenty of other tools to work with. At Daily EOB we see decr vol with an IB. We just logged an A turn with this bar. If volume decreases from this bar in subsequent daily bars we'd still be in A turn non-Dom traverse hugging the RTL of the larger short channel.
    This is the setup for a B-turn and return to Dominance set forth at Jul 1. This is also the setup for a C-turn and Change of Dominance. The amount of volume that arrives will determine which of the two channels we have annotated is currently valid and the one that has served it's purpose.

    With this daily bar, we see a missing leg1. What did price action do at other OB->IB combinations with same volume profile of peak to trough and a missing 1st leg?
  59. Went down like a rock 10-29 May (though, after BO of OB downside). PA could be overextended at short-term (looking at 1yr chart) and medium trend definately down (again 1 yr chart), but change of sentiment could also provide some support.

    Looking at 1 yr I'd expect some pull back to a new P3, but if PA rockets up it'd be nice to be able to jump aboard too (though this is what proper stock picking will aid in so not a big concern here).
  60. Could be similar PA to 2-9 Jun with sideways drift, Change of Dominance and DU of volume, though we won't know it will play out too similar, there could be similarities.
  61. Good. You are reading the market.

    The second attachment in the enclosed quote is the chart that you continue to build upon. Build on your annotations. Post a bar by bar log.
    As Bars fill in, add annotations and log the bar. Each bar is a feedback cycle of learning. Logging each bar builds capacity.

    Do the same for the next timescale up.

    Same for the next timescale down.

    We are creating a goldilocks zone. Aware of a larger context as well as a smaller.

    We are then looking for the common thrusts of Dominance as well as the turning points in trend.

    These are the areas of convergence, nodal points.
  62. This is a bit curious, I thought volume bars were painted according to close-open, but it seems to be close.0-close.1 in BigCharts-charts (please see last bar 11 Jul):


    We're only interested in close-open volume colour right?

    Updated EOD chart according to yesterday's action. PA action around fast TL on low volume today it seems.

    I'm working on getting annotation working in NT as using screenshots gets to be too limited with scaling issues and lack of options / usability. Though I see doing it manually may provide deeper insight, it'll currently take up too much time and effort to annotate and draw all this manually, and am getting curious what can be made to annotate this in trading software and hopefully provide more flexibility for new data and changing views.
  63. Bar colors are preference controlled. Either keyed to the open and close of current bar or close vs close of b.1 and b.0

    We are looking at open and close of current bar.

    Otherwise we would have to dig into de-gapping, mentally or with software. Which is more of an advanced topic.

    Manual annotations are the quickest way to mastery. Until one gets to unconscious competence.
    Programming has it's own process of creating clarity and time-saving.
    It's a personal decision open to revisiting if ever one gets stuck.

    However atm, it's a short-circuiting process that trips up many a well-intentioned trader. One's programming will follow the constructs of one's mind.

    Since you are in the EOD timescale, you've already created the necessary context to inform on this timescale and the faster one below it.

    Do the same on the next greater Timescale , that is the next one to annotate.

    Once you have your annotated charts, it's a very quick process to update one of them EOD. The other on weekends. You could skip the faster fractal for now. It would be more applicable to calibrating timing of entry's and exits intraday.

    As you see, yesterday's bar filled in between the bounds that we set from the day before.

    The annotations of b2b2r2b and r2r2b2r need some rework. First just look for the b2b's and r2r's. They are at the beginning of every trend. It looks like a trough coming from the prior bar and then an increasing Dominant Volume bar. This is the move from pt1 to pt2 of the pattern.

    Decr B to Incr B to Decr R to Incr B

    similar logic for r2r.
  64. Unfortunately Big Charts offer just "Volume+" among other indicators such as RSI/Stoch/..., so no parameters for their coloured volume indicator. They only provide just a simple web service, so get limited fast over time it seems.

    Yea, I understand the principle and very good to keep it simple.

    Cool. I'm inspired so just need to do it and see where it leads.

    Yes, I certainly notice the difference, two very different operations of mind. While doing everything manually using a drawing program, I noticed certain limitations, lack of flexibility and filtering that I'd like to see if I can amend though.

    Please look at GOOG EOD-chart and see if this helps readability. It's all 100% What We Know That We Know and a purely visual aid. The price bar "glow" indicate rising volume, as well as volume bars separating both rising/declining volume and rising/declining price (proper Close - Open volume colour). Otherwise, attempting to keep clutter to minimum ("less is more").


    I'll review the patterns as well, although maybe it's possible to use the new charts going further after that? I believe it'll be a more practical approach due to time constraints on my part. It'll also provide some of the power of trading software, so hopefully less time trying to workaround limitations (scaling issues, re-using annotations, etc.). Can do any US stocks, ie. through Kinetick. Easier to analyse US data since NT won't allow generic imports of data.

    I do have my reasons why the annotation is a bit different. Please keep mind open :)
    In many respects this is a bit of evolution from the painted screenshots we've been working on. If the picture is too large/wide, I can make it smaller or maybe zooming (clicking image in ET) will help.
  65. Wow...this is about the best charting thread I've come across. It's very similar to my candlesticking--to the extent that I didn't even have to read the posts to understand the first chart and those 5x5 grids of patterns. I'll have to give this a careful read when I get the time.

    Time to follow two more users!
  66. Not compiling properly under latest NT7 patch (7.0.1000.35), though can and should paint traverses and channels manually for now. Would be nice with something that persists annotations to disk later though.
  67. I have the same version and I see no problems. What error are you seeing?
  68. Here's updates to the original chart:

    Tapes makes traverses, makes channels, but seems traverses and channels may sometimes merge (big Channel P2)?

    Angle from Big Channel P1 keeps flatting out (Big Channel P1 to its P2, P3 to latest OB (Short to Extend).

    Price currently inside Latteral with downward PA and volume so far.

  69. Yes. We are observing the decreasing of pace which occur in all uninterrupted trends. By identifying Dominant and non-Dominant traverses, and return to dominance as pace changes, the trading zones of high and low risk come into view.

    Risk management is defined and applied differently in shorter timeframes.
    Moves with increasing pace = decreased risk.

    We observe the first indication of retracement to reversal from prior trend with increasing pace of volume in the opposite price direction. This will happen as price clears the RTL of the green channel.

    However to stimulate business, it's better to appeal to as many participants as possible. Price will frequently fill in the larger Sym pennant defined by the long and short channel.

    It will not do this if a surge of Dominant Volume comes before the leading edge of the the Sym.

    We know this because we will see a XO of either of our (short and long) RTL's as a move becomes a successful BO or instead we log a FBO.

    If one is one thing it is not the other. The market operates on negative logic. We build on what we know by observing what we see is not.

    In other words, as we test our possible scenarios, we get a true or false. As we collect falses, we end up with what it can only be - the truth.

    Yet our context always holds multiple possibilities.

    The field of anticipation is much larger than the field of prediction. One is expansive the other contractive.

  70. Started on weekly chart for PNDORA. Traverses seem to morph into channels in huge sustained moves:

    Or like this:

  71. Since you're starting on a new chart I thought it might be worth sharing this. While I'm aware continuing with the same symbol (PNDORA, on a different bar interval) offers synergistic benefits due to it's continuity with the work already done ...imagine for a second how the results of doing that going forward, ...would compare to the results obtained if a more mainstream symbol were being analyzed. A symbol with a larger following. I mention this in part because I don't have access to PNDORA data, but even if I did (like if I imported the data) it still distracts me (from following the market).

    I define the market as ES, NQ, YM (or SPY, QQQ, and DIA). I believe a lot more people would want to follow along and possibly participate in this topic, if it were possible to change to one of these symbols.

    That is in no way meant to imply I personally want to publish anything, on this thread or any thread. I want to program tapes, traverses and channels in TradeStation, for my own use.
  72. As a daily user of some of these methods, I agree with this idea.

    One thing that has not been mentioned, perhaps just overlooked, is that containers (referred to in this this thread as tapes, traverses, and channels) are DEFINED by volume, not by visual geometry, not by price alone. Defined by volume. Points 1,2,3, and characteristics like FTT, BO, FBO, & VE; ALL have specific requirements. If it was as easy as drawing a parallelogram container and counting to 3, well, enough said.

    I will add, since September became front month, for NQ, for me, I am only trading tapes. Wider containers are just not defined (by volume) with clarity for trading. It's also quite interesting and a change of pace to follow RTY, from it's first day of trade.

    Trade On!
  73. Can you kindly illustrate this point by an example from one of your charts?

    I tend to agree however this technique can be lead to problems in fast moving markets. Perhaps you have developed ways that avoid such issues.
  74. The second gives more usable context.

    We started with a symbol and chart that you have a personal interest in.

    We started here for here you were willing to do work. The method starts where you are.

    With that said, both dratsum and tiddlywinks have good comments.

    The method's approach to risk management is by the implicit diversification that comes with trading an Index AND/OR by going through the process of scanning for and building a universe of High Quality stocks. Both involve a method of managing risk. Building a Universe of HQ stocks has a long bias. Although stocks that, through the repeating cycles of Acc/Dist, do provide opportunities to short, it's left to the individual trader to apply the necessary adjustments from a firm grasp of the principals. In contrast the PVT method rotates stocks in and out of holding positions as they progress through their Dominant traverses.

    Although Pandora's fundamentals could be an opportunity for a LT position (no idea), it's observable PV action would exclude it rather than make it to this list. We know by price action, that this stock does not have eps>90 nor rs>90, both a requirement to make it to this list of high quality stocks. Sometimes due to market conditions the aforementioned parameters are adjusted to screen for a larger set of qualifying stocks. (ie. eps>80, rs>80)

    As an educational exercise Pandora is fine but misses other essentials that are also foundational concepts. The goal of this undertaking, aside from the spectrum of differentiation that you are building within your mind, is to make money.

    We can make money by not losing money too.

    Back to the idea of Failsafes. The first component of a FS is the horizontal lateral boundaries that we draw on the bar before. When price moves directionally opposite of where we were anticipating, XO of this line changes context. This is where tight stops are used in CW. We do not use them the same way. Nor suffer the same effects.
    The second component of a FS comes from looking at all the fastest fractal tapes. You will notice the slope of the RTL. Observe the slope of the RTL from a 2 bar combination.

    When the slope is steep what does price on the next bar do?
    What if when the slope is shallow?

    As this two bar tape is drawn, What does the the second bar do in our order of events when volume has
    1) incr from the prior bar ?
    2) decr from the prior bar ?

    3) What happens with price and the RTL on the third bar?

    The reference points tiddlywinks has mentioned can be applied to the fastest fractal first.

    We do this for we know that all larger trends develop from any two bars we contextualize, accurately and throughly.
  75. Jack's RDBMS - BO,T1 of the Failsafe addresses this.

    Any 2 bar high volatility move is bound by a RTL. Next bar close XO of this line is the pt1 of new trend segment. As you say, it can lead to problems when there's a short non-Dominant traverse and price translation begins again with return to dominance.

    Stacking EE's on a single bar can alleviated this particular issue. BO,T1 and BM-rev can occur on any bar and overrides any EE identified. The two operate in tandem at fast paced misidentified turns.

    However, more detailed discussion for a different thread.

    The Failsafes are applicable here in this context.
  76. Not sure what problems you refer too. I do use faster than 5min charts however. Additionally, if trading a narrower container, almost all "problems" have lesser time in trade, and if trading tape points and/or ftt, many times its academic, intuitive, and, [yawn], boring. Up down up down, down up down up.

    Sure. This is NQ, 4minute, from yesterday, 7/11/17. Before anyone gives me crap, yes, I know I fractal jump! I annotate this in real-time and make adjustment real-time. Volume Gaussians tell you what you have, which is not necessarily the same as what you see in price bars alone. And I already mentioned I fractal jump.

    I give yesterday rather than today, because of the 40pt gap. But you can see I was ready. The white dashed guassians, if they are correct, which I added/adjusted at the open , suggest todays gap + (runaway) up move, is a move to point 2... there is no 3 point yet on the wider/slower containers, and that is based on the definition of points being defined by volume.

    I'll try to answer specific questions, and maybe learn or change a thing or two in the process.
  77. Thanks for posting your chart, tiddlywinks.

    So it appears that you wait for either b2b->2r->2b | r2r->2b->2r to complete and then wait for Signal For Change (SFC) which will be your entry, exit or reverse.

    If so, I follow a similar routine. The difficulty is that if a position is held after the completion of point 2, the retrace may be significant enough that it may result in forfeiture of most of the profits. OTOH, if the position is reversed at point 2, the retrace may be insignificant and the return to dominance can be quick and swift. In such a case, as Sprout stated above, BM should be utilized. However as illHeroic mentioned in past threads, his observations showed that often this resulted in small but frequent losses.

    Another problem could be such a sequence: b2b->2r->2b->2r->2b->2r->2b...

    Here there is a tendency to make an error in determining SFC and one could reverse into a position which as previously stated, can return to dominance quickly and violently. We saw such an example in simple's earlier charts in which after a completion of b2b->2r->2b, we observed a r2r tape with Ve. More than likely most of us would have held a short position at this juncture but it would have been a mistake as 2b resumed immediately after the r2r Ve. Sprout marked the inside bar after Ve as a FTT, but with all due to respect to him, it is highly doubtful that it would have been correctly identified as such in realtime.

    What I have described above is simply a symptom of not being able to concretely identify the portion of the cycle (i.e. b2b, etc.), SFC and continuation of dominance ad infinitum (i.e. 2r->2b->2r->2b...) on a regular basis. Various threads by Spydertrader here on ET and 'Traders Laboratory' were devoted to such discussions. In the latest and last thread on TL, it was not unusual for various participants to post a chart of the ES for the same period with somewhat significantly different annotations.

    The late Jack Hershey made an attempt to transform this exercise into an algorithm through his volume annotations which Stepan has named JHM 2.0. Our friend Sprout has made a valiant effort to clarify much of the definitions and concepts behind each label. Despite that, it is highly doubtful that we have taken a single step beyond what Spydertrader presented here (JHM 1.0) on ET or the last Price\Volume thread on TL.

    At the end of the trading day, profitability is highly dependent on a judgment exercise based upon abstract concepts which are transposed on price\volume charts with variable clarity.
  78. Actually, I trade point to point (including ftt, which if identified correctly is point 1), and additional container traverses. Obviously I (try to) "follow" along with slower containers, in addition to fast I use for trade. I constantly look for confluence (with other methods I employ too. JH comprises about 70%) and when it's there, I size up and go for the longer hold. Of course, SFC is confluence too, but Im just referring to dominance (or non-dominance) lining up on 2 or more containers. This occurs with ftt too.

    As for the other stuff you mention... I do not get lost in minutia. My charts do not give any time for that. Lines I draw on my screen are just that, lines on my screen; anything can happen, as you've highlighted. If a trade goes wrong, I'm out, profit, loss, doesn't matter... next! While Im not an SCT trader, I put on my fair share of trades and contracts. Through osmosis, and threads like this, I learn minutia; some tidbits I don't even realize I know/use.

    Sequels are rarely as good as the first.
  79. Steep slopes tend to be short-lived, often with price turning on a dime and reversing just as fast and sometimes even faster. Steep slopes + shallow retrace signify DOM and sign of trend. Next bar tend to touch or break steep slopes, while shallow slopes tend to be more respected even if touched, and can become steep slopes in further bars.

    1) Accellerate (even steeper slope) or absorption (last leg)
    2) Decellerate, pulling back or start of reversal (FTT)
    3) more chance of BO accompanied by volume spike in direction of BO (new opposing trend)

    So using shallow slope with trend on low volume can be used to enhance FS or even tighten stop-loss in non-DOM Lateral.

    Traversal can be drawn from last BO to next bar on rising volume, however if FBO is respected, then that can form a new P3 for analysis sake?
  80. That is a really good exchange between svrs and tiddlywinks. svrs has done a great job of explaining what the crux of this method has always been; applying a real-time judgement onto a ever-unique context based off a theoretical model. The amount of complexity and rules helpful for each individual to do that varies.

    Spyder started out jumping fractals all over the place, with little technical requirements for containers or completed sequences and still managed to be profitable. At the end of his posting he had refined things into quite a detailed and consistent set of rules. I always go back to the Channel drills he posted; I'm pretty sure I understand all of the nuances and rules he used to build equal containers and promote them with pace in order to maintain fractal integrity.

    But all trading the much slower fractals really does is stretch out the same decisions you'd be making every 10-15 minutes over the course of a day or two. When it comes down to it there is no perfect answer. You need to make a decision on how to interpret present data and act on it. Some of the best months I ever put up in trading were in 2016, which I posted some of the graphs for, were also by far my messiest months trading, where I didn't try to perfect my method, and I didn't try to over-analyze my mistakes, but I just let myself play the game and win more than I lost.

    Anyway, I don't know if this thread is the place for a discussion like this. I don't want to derail the exchange Simples and Sprout are trying to have. But I thought this paragraph by tiddlywinks especially captures what it takes to really succeed with this stuff. And from everything he's posted tiddlywinks seems like he's been doing this stuff successfully AND consistently for quite some time now. He may very well be the best PV trader we have still active in a public capacity. Thanks for continuing to take the time to contribute now and then.

  81. As a point of clarity, am appreciative of the contrast provided by svrz, tiddlywinks and Heroic. I have much respect, appreciation and gratitude for their prior work.

    Their comments do point to something other than what has been explicitly expressed. The work that you are doing builds perception and if applied through consistent practice in turn builds confidence. The method is accurate and exact in it's systemic operation. Any conclusion other than that has the seed of doubt based on an incomplete dataset. The incompletion is not due to any aspects of the method.

    It's within.

    There is a wellspring, an inner guidance that is available to anyone. It's always here.

    The role of doubt is to mask this inner source of guidance. Doubt's function is to slow one down. Doubt when left unchecked is paralyzing when timely action is required.

    This in turn will exclude one from having consistent and lasting success in any endeavor one feels inspired to create. We are the creators of our own reality. We have free will to choose how we feel in the face of any and all circumstances.

    Happy people with no money.
    Unhappy people with lot's of money.
    Unhappy people with no money.
    Happy people with lot's of money.

    Thinking the money is the cause of their happiness is looking for something outside themselves. It can be the cause in some contexts but not all.

    There is always a greater understanding to achieve, at the cost of a prior (what can now be seen as a limiting) belief.

    What someone else has achieved or not with these methods is solely within one's own sphere of influence. Any other thinking is victim mentality.

    There is no cure for doubt.

    There is only shifting one's focus to increasing confidence.

    When one says that feelings don't matter. Ok, you get to wake up on the wrong side of bed randomly and to decreased wellbeing with no influence in the matter.

    Feelings do matter.

    Every exceptional moment of one's life has a feeling associated with it.

    It is the basis of a living a loving life.

    Back to Failsafes.

    Let's go back to the ten cases and look at the Sym. Depending on how large the 2nd bar is compared to the 1st will determine the slope of the respective RTL's. The pair is enclosed with the lateral boundaries thus forming a container. This container has 2 independent and opposing FS pairs within it. We see which becomes Dominant as we move up to XB or down to XR. This now valid RTL is the early bird FS of the horizontal lateral FS. Early bird FS's are when price XO this RTL line. In lateral formations this will happen quite frequently.

    However when we are in a Dominant traverse the only place this (XO of RTL) occurs is at the end of the first Dominant leg of the traverse. We will also notice this XO happens on decreasing volume. Thus Break Out on Trough 1 has come into view.

    This is the first trough after a single peak in volume or a series of successively peaking volume bars.
    This is the end of the lowest risk trade.

    Price can and frequently takes off with more XB's or XR's. We are working bar-by-bar. The RTL gets an increased slope due to the increased pace. Our FS adjusts for this. We move our pair of FS up Bar-by-bar as need arises. The pair now refers to a RTL and the horizontal line that intersects at pt1. This horizontal line (lateral boundary opposite of price direction) in known as a Bookmark. BM being one of the two types of FS's. A BM frequently is placed near the apex of a turn. It's our hard stop or reversal point depending on the type of trader one is - Enter/Exit or Hold/Reverse.

    The end of this particular Dominant traverse is always the XO of the RTL. This move can be a single leg of a larger Dominant traverse. This can be a single bar of pause or a lateral before the larger Dominant Traverse presents itself. It doesn't matter. We are bar-by-bar working faster fractal containers first, identifying Dom and non-Dom.

    The cost to frequently adjusting to be on the right side of the market does come with a cost. The psychological cost is that one isn't doing something right. That's an inaccurate assessment. We are perceiving the precise flow of Dominance and non-Dominance in the market at this resolution with the current tools at our disposal.

    This BO can also happen on incr vol and we have defined that as a C-turn.

    At every moment there is the right side of the market. Adjust the mental frame of your annotations and logging so that this is your home.
  82. Just wanted to follow-up with the "analysis" from yesterday.

    Here is my updated NQ 4minute chart.
    Further, here's my NQ 2 minute chart... my primary chart for trading.

    That's what prompted me to post charts, hopefully illustrative of such.

    Just as important reminder... I am not a JH guru, and even less of an expert annotating volume gaussians. And just in case I haven't made it clear, I am a fractal jumper!

    If you don't use volume to build your containers (and points),
    you are using a personal invention. The PV relationship is explicit.
    In my experience, the explicitness allows the relationship to be eventually, self-correcting.
  83. Over years I found that 4 Min chart is better suit for JHM and with superimposing ES to NQ is very helpful to do MADA as I am trading ES.

    ES-NQ  07_13_2017.jpg
  84. It's fascinating that 2 bars may extend into more and more context by reading new information flowing into the current fractal. Attempting to learn by doing through guidance.

    Anticipating trends with volume and range at daily fractal bars. Treating Sym's as anti-trend artifacts (basically non-DOM within Traversal).



    Looks "heavy", like it's being pulled down, at least while plunging into and staying in bear Channel. No black volume redeeming all the big red volume on long range bars yet. Actions within Channel/higher fractal (ie. 3-6 Jul) seems to show volume DU and FRV before price BO on DOM-bar 7 Jul.

    Unprocessed weekly shows bearish tapes (red) in the period:



  85. The 2m is a good looking chart. Relaxing and activating at the same time.

    The first SFC and early entry started at 9:26 with the 10:00 a Dominant SFC that the right side of the market is to be short.

    An area of interest is the trend segments from 10:24 to 11:00 are the clearest Fastest Fractal's First's annotated on the chart. They are the thinnest channels yet price remained within the RTL. Steep sloped RTL's are a low risk area for bar-by-bar trading. There were 5 trades from reversing on XO of the RTL. This XO is usually on the open or close, we are looking at the doji as it appears as legs of a bar are built. It makes the most coin per unit of time and the exit is pretty clear to see.

    In this case the geometry of a two bar pt1,2,3,ve,ftt define our fractal container. Volume gaussians are observed intrabar. All we know is if vol is incr or decr from the first bar until one does the 5x5 (with the diagonal doji's) drill.
    Make a couple of copies of the grid and then on one copy trace as you did the sym several posts ago but do it with color. ie. From the open, price decr, then as the price oscillates on the bar and the position of the closing tick relative to the opening tick trace price as a continuous line. The goal is to de-construct the building of a bar from a vertical orientation to a horizontal one. A 5min bar with a snapshot at 1min intervals gives 5 vertical lines linked through a de-gapped closing and opening ticks.

    There is the path of least resistance, which builds most bars.
    There is the path of most volatility, which builds the bar by presenting more doji's as price oscillates.

    It's important to perceive the difference.
  86. Yes, very good deductions.

    Adding more bars to your display will be helpful. Lot's of times during debriefing one sees a larger context that clears confusion.
  87. Here's my charts for NQ yesterday. I had one long from 9:48 to 10:10. The FTT up didn't quite have the type of volume I was expecting for an intermediate-level turning point so I was looking to get back in for another leg up at some point.

    After we started seeing decent XR vol I had to adjust my expectations. I was willing to short one if a good entry came about but there was never really a pronounced non-dom leg to hop into for another trip down.

    Lastly I considered a long right around 10:45 that would've worked out quite well, but after the breach of 5780 I knew it'd be fighting the slow dominant sentiment; the lateral forming made up my mind since trading non-dom out of one of those isn't usually too lucrative. Pace was decent enough for it to have worked though. Still coming off a hiatus so I think I'm still a little more gun-shy than usual.

    Regarding the larger picture, still hard to convince myself that this two week trend made it's high with how the PV looks at 10:00. And it's too much of a wedge all of yesterday afternoon for me to be that confident on what we're building at the moment. Clearly an r2r2b2r of some sort is easy to see from ~10:00 to ~14:00. But whether we'll have some more conviction down or a drift into new highs is something I need more information to decide at this point.
  88. An update on NQ 4min. What an exercise this turned into, tracking the wide container.
    Recall, the point is...
    containers are defined through volume, not through visual geometry.

    So the previous iteration of this chart had points 1 and supposed 2. Non-dom volume did not follow point 2, making P2 questionable. And at the open on Friday a NEW P2 formed, followed by the required non-dom volume for P3. There are at least 5 fractals in play on this chart , imo. It is very easy to fractal jump even with thinking.

    Anyway, 4min NQ, based on my work, here are the possibilities...
    1) be on lookout for FTT -or-
    2) BR cycling... 5880 area is the top of at least one of the many fractals in play.

    Ideally, If FTT is to occur, I would like to see dom-volume of 12K+
  89. Comments are within quoted text.

    Something similar to the above quote, one of the statements that I took as true that I eventually came to conclusion that my interpretation of the statement was incorrect is the concept that ALL gaussians sequences MUST complete.
    Well, I suppose this is true for the given context it was originally presented within. However, the market has demonstrated that this is not true all the time. Trends can and are interrupted at anytime. The updated context is that (without the arrival of Dominant volume in the opposite price direction), volume gaussians will complete - on this timescale or a faster one.
  90. I think the above is wrong conclusion.
    "Price trend will not change until volume complete sequences on all fractals." - is cardinal rule of JHM.
    Without that rule it could be anything but JHM.

  91. Sure, I agree with your sentiment. If you wouldn't mind, let's see the exact quote from Jack and it's context.

    The above statement can be interpreted in a variety of ways. I first came across that concept with Spydertrader's TL thread. The way I misinterpreted it was that a trend on a larger timeframe must complete it's volume gaussians on that timeframe. I also assumed that gaussians and volume events were equivalent.

    A more accurate statement is that the volume OOE's must complete before the start of a new trend with similar fractal sized containers.

    Jack advocated the use of the Johari window.
    I haven't come across the "Price trend will not change until volume complete sequences on all fractals." statement by him, so I missed it, if it indeed exists.

    Volume sequences and volume gaussians are not the same thing. Volume sequences can complete within a gaussian. There can be multiple gaussians for a particular volume event. Jack's RDBMS defines this exactly, without flaws, anomalies or exceptions. By it's very design it has defined all possible permutations of price and volume movements.

    If one treats the 10 price cases and the 11 volume elements as a multiplication table, a complete set comes into view. That set can be divided into like-to-like buckets giving the 56 unique and individual components.

    I speak from applying my understanding of Jack's writings, doing every drill I could find, coming up with some of my own drills and applying it to experience the turning point of consistent profitability. My understanding experienced a higher-order level of congruency by recently completing his "20 days to expert" challenge.

    Exercising MADA manually leads to a very different place than having it performed programmatically.
  92. Recall, the point is...
    containers are defined through volume, not through visual geometry.
    On MY trading fractal... that's a good one sprout! It reminds me of a scene in My Cousin Vinny
    ... perhaps the laws of physics cease to exist on your stove! Were these magic grits?!?

    It applies to 2-bar geometry as well, it is just not seen in a volume histogram. 1,2,3,ftt,whatever, are fungible in that it is a point, not necessarily the same point, in at least one (or more) faster, AND possibly one (or more) slower fractals. You mentioned there are 100's of fractals on the chart. I agree. It's interesting Jack suggested annotating geometry and gaussians of 3 fractals, and simultaneously used 7 pace levels. That's because he knew there were more than 3 fractals with any time-based chart, and pace is an aid in seeing. Please note, I agree visual geometry of 2-bar (and other fractals) in real-time is fine for a coarse generalized view as long as its in-accuracy is considered. That means using some sort of application of the sequence(s) being monitored, whatever application that may be.

    Huh? Lateral formations an "indicator" of sub-fractals asserting dominance? Huh?
    I'm currently doing all sorts of study and stuff with laterals. I've never seen anything described even remotely as you've mentioned. It's either an Aha or some invention. Im on the side of some invention, at this time.

    As I've mentioned before, my primary trading chart is 2min. I trade tapes(lately) point-to-point, and when I have a well defined wider container, I attempt to hold through for wider container point. I am not SCT, but I do quite of daily trading.

    Agree. As mentioned above.
  93. FWIW I agree with stepan and tiddlywinks. That is Spyder's teaching in a nutshell. This is the cardinal difference between what Jack was doing later on and what Spyder did imo. Spyder defined containers with price AND volume requirements, and three identical containers completed the X2X 2Y 2X of a slower fractal. Spyder spoke pretty clearly late in his thread about how you need to make the 2Y and the 2X just how you made the X2X.

    He was clear that there is are minimum requirements needed to build certain fractals, and price will keep going until we get that.

    Jack often watched the visible fractal which doesn't always have the same rhyme or reason and the sequences aren't visible. I can see where you're coming from Sprout, but you're looking through the lens of the RDBMS and bar by bar tapes and it doesn't seem like you've had the aha moments for fractal integrity and the objective consistency of the x2x2y2x gaussian sequence.

    That definitely isn't the end all of the method, seeing as Spyder was profitable back when he was jumping fractals, before he was even drawing complete gaussians. But doing what you're doing compared to looking at the big picture sequences is like apples to oranges. There's going to be a lot of mis-communications trying to compare the two.

  94. Tiddlywinks, I thought you were rogue?

    Comments within quoted text.
  95. Thank you for your comment. I've been hoping to delay responding directly to you, prior to accomplishing the thing that you requested from me. All I can say at this time is that it's on deck and moving through milestones, getting ready for the first pitch of the season.

    Comments included in quoted text.
  96. I am rogue!!

    I don't use a 5 min chart, and as far as TRADING is concerned, 4 hour is the max I look at. I shun degapping, and with disdain for bar-by-bar degapping. Carryover is a hit or miss concept because overnight prints matter. Additionally, I believe EEs ala JHv2, are not usable trade signals by themselves and they promote over-trading, fractal jumping, and in general I consider fishing for a trade. Furthermore, I use astro methods(in addition to JH) to anticipate points, peaks, and troughs. Astro is anchored and immutable in TIME.

    FWIW, regarding lats I have a new lat-end. It's possible this is part of "retro" process (which I do not use/do), but here it is, invention or not, for you to determine... while lat remains valid, ANY pricebar that can be considered an OB to the first bar of the lat ends the lat, and is treated as an OB. That's ANY bar while the lat is active, that can be considered an OB to the lat itself. The bar is not required to be an OB to its previous bar, and it's close does not matter. End the lat, and treat the bar as you would an OB.

    Trade On!
  97. Comments within quoted text.

    I find it a bit humorous for those whom derived value from Jack's perspective to not give the man his full due. He's a systems genius, the best thinkers of humanity are his peers. If one follows his directions, there is a realized promise. The view is witnessing the market's full offer. The market's FULL OFFER.

    Everything pales in comparison. It's just the way it is.

    It's all about slowing down the pitch and seeing the stripes on that ball.

    Going with the nautical analogy, it's shifting from a monohull sailboat to a hydro-foiled trimaran.

    Jack is a man who keeps his promises. I say this in the present tense because his thoughts and perspective live on in his writings and the discussion thereof.

  98. You've pissed me off sprout. I did not put Jack down, his methods, or even you for that matter. The fact is I learned directly from Jack and Spyder, did my (initial)studies with and through them, made my own determinations as to what if any portion of the teachings/methods would be valid FOR ME (and I was a profitable trader BEFORE that time), and then proceeded down MY PATH... Not Jacks path, Spyders, Heros, or anyone elses, MY path. And I have ALWAYS spoke of Jack and Spyder with respect, good memories, and internal thanks/gratitude.

    Get off your high fucking horse! If origami helps you trade, cool. But that remains to be determined.

    BTW... Yes, it would be OB to all bars WITHIN a lat. However, if adjacent to ANY bar, not just XB,XR, that pierces the boundary(s), my description stands. And it may or may not be an OB to any other bars that previously pierced boundary(s) but did not end the lat. FYI...merely piercing a boundary is not a lat-end.
  99. I did state this in my reply to you:
    "I understand we can both be looking at the same data and coming up with entirely different conclusions. I respect that. I also respect you and my intention is that my words will reflect that there is more to realize with Jack's work and not anything else that was not intended."

    In my replies to you, I've expressed my appreciation and gratitude towards you, multiple times. If there's anything you should be left with in our interaction it is that.
  100. Both one and the other may hold true, or be successfully utilized by someone somehow. Merely attempting to convince others is futile CW. Showing them the stream, to experience and act on by themselves, there's a chance of transference. That's a gift, and not to be trampled upon. Please remain open to potential pearls.

  101. Started on monthly chart. Didn't draw the smaller trendlines at top yet, though long-term looks like potential for acceleration (after a nasty pullback in Q3 2015). Shorter-term trendlines may reveal when that may no longer be true.


    Pretty sloppy work after a shortish vacation, but interesting as background.
  102. AAPL from 2016, identifying P-turns from volume together with pricetrends and extensions of P3's:

  103. QQQ EOD chart. Expecting bottom in next bar (15.8) around/above 141-142, next bar after that (16.8) to stop ~144.5 before continued acceleration to upside. However, PA violating RTLs or VE bear-case would invalidate that "just-for-fun" guess. For bullcase to be intact price should establish above 145 / bear RTL within just beyond 5-7 trading days, the faster the better, but also with rising black volume. Notice decreasing red volume since Jun, though unless black volume overtakes soon, may still provide some trouble for longs.


    Max pain scenario with bull intact (volatility exaggerated due to uncertainty):

    More black volume and more volatility to upside will signal bullishness (ofc), especially if blasting through 146 on huge volatility and black volume.
  104. You contradicted yourself.
  105. Yes. They're both wrong I think.

    UPDATE: Above scenario is very bullish. A more moderate scenario would be test down to approx. 139 and rebound there, though that would start challenging the lower green RTL (much less bullish = sideways+up), though would from recent 3 bars expect support to hold at 141.
  106. Closer look:

    QQQ (Daily)  2_27_2017 - 8_28_2017.jpg

    Big picture:

    QQQ (Daily)  2_11_2015 - 8_28_2017.jpg
  107. Nice chart! 2 year chart period provides a better perspective it seems.

    @stepan7 : Do your price/volume bar-colors help you interpret the chart?

    Been busy developing on new system. Seems markets are stuck in sideways development, which can still be bullish and reserves some energy for more momentum upwards. However, latest bear trend is also developing, so more correction shouldn't be surprising either.. It does seem to peter out lately though, using time.

    Very simple current situation. Negative volume petering out, but waiting for new black volume to resume. MACD shows new potential too, but still not broken out:

  108. Yes. Tremendously.

    QQQ (Daily)  3_30_2017 - 8_30_2017.jpg
  109. That's a good looking color scheme Stepan7.
    I have some color blindness and usually go with black background so I end up with a limited color palette, but with high contrast. White backgrounds limit the palette too severely to be of use for me. I'm gonna mess around a bit. And since I'm re-writing, nah, just improving MY pv stuff, it's perfect timing. Thanks for the ideas!

    I like the way you've colorized volume, following flaws. Nice.
  110. What's "flaw"? Movements on decreasing volume?
    Jun-Jul looks very readable if you wait for black bars and RTL BO.
    Good way to distinguish Dom / Non-Dom!

    Yesterday looks like may become BO of latest bear RTL on increasing volume.
  111. Per Hershey PV, there are 10 price-bar cases (as mentioned in the thread title.)
    Only 2 of those 10 make money for the trader. The other cases are considered flaws.
    Flaws may (or may not) give permission to analyze (use) the associated volume for context and continuation of the current volume sequence. As you know, for futures trading, SCT in particular, JH methodology requires bar-by-bar analysis.

    At first glance, Stepan7 colorizes the price bar flaws and associated volume. Upon looking closer, it seems the colorization does not apply to all 8 of the flaws, and also includes some permission and/or other type logic, but without visible distinction when applied. In particular I am looking at and referring to the orange? ish? bars both on price and volume. And the bar that immediately follows such.

    Please note: This is not a critique or criticism of Stepan7 or his work. I LIKE IT!!
  112. To make it simple to understand, consider "flaw" as consolidation, per JHM it's should occur on Declining Volume (orange or green), and will resolve itself in the directional Dominant move on Rising Volume (red or black). All "flaws" are Non-Dominant.

    When working with the Volume one should understand that Volume has two characteristics: 1) Volume Relative to previous Volume (green vs black or orange vs red) and 2) Historical Absolute Volume value (horizontal pace lines).

  113. I like it too! We tend to bypass bar-bar analysis.

    For 2) is that different historical volume averages?
  114. Volume Rank.
  115. SPY
    SPY (Daily)  3_31_2017 - 8_31_2017.jpg
    DIA (Daily)  3_31_2017 - 8_31_2017.jpg
    QQQ (Daily)  3_31_2017 - 8_31_2017.jpg
  116. Stepan, I was inspired by the bar coloring, it really helps! Thanks!

    ES1 D 20170915.jpeg
  117. Good luck using it! :)
  118. qqq_story_2017-10-27.png

    What's the story here?
  119. Interesting. How are you painting the bars?

    In terms of what must come next. The most recent short trend has progressed into a accelerated Dominant traverse of a short channel with points 1, 2, 3 defined. Three things on deck, IB, VE or FTT. One has supporting volume to continue the Dominant traverse short breaking the low, one will reverse in the opposite direction and break the high of the previous bar. The third is what contains both PA within the range of the previous bar for as long as it can before revealing itself of which way it will truly break-out. Frequently, this BO becomes a FBO if PA brings price back within the previous bar's range.

    Setting up Bookmarks on either end of the range as well as imaginary RTL's on this bar will create zones of confidence as the current bar builds as to which of the above scenarios are coming into Dominance. More importantly, it will show the shift in Dominance as the bar builds.

    Also, as counter-intuitive this might seem, having the current bar build in the center of the chart makes a subtle difference in bias.

    The bias is one of perceptual influence that the past has on the future coming into the present.

    edit: Although the methodology makes frequent mention of the RTL, that's not the zone to experience consistent profits. The zone for consistent profits is having attention on the developing LTL. It's a transition many fail to make for to 'see' it, one must 'see' empty space as having utility. This distinction comes into easier view as one spends more time on the DOM, T&S and tick charts. These are finer tools that have their own center of gravity and can pull one in by forgetting the relevance and function of larger contexts created by the use of annotating tapes/traverses/channels on longer timeframes. One of the valuable things to discern from the activity on the DOM and T&S is that market orders move the market.
  120. The bars are an experiment in NT painting bars by code (DrawRectangle and such functions). Grey bars on non-DOM/decreasing volume. Red/green/black bars on increasing volume selling/buying/strong buying. Thickness according to various factors of DOM (what we know that we know like Lateral BO). Green/red area above/below close.

    I believe it shows where there's effort, direction of bars of effort and areas within bars with conflicting effort. When you connect the colors, patterns of supply/demand emerge and is easier to see. I don't use it for trading, but think it can serve as learning / idea tool.
  121. Thought I'd post here to first say hello to the remaining JH cronies/minions/kool-aid drinkers/believers/traders and to just give an overall thanks to all involved for the JH stuff!!

    As JH often said of his methods, "you know that you know".

    Today was my epiphany that I know that I know.

    Here's my 4 minute trading chart of Russell 2000 for today. It was annotated and traded in real time. A near 60 point linear range today. Do I dare say I captured 87% of that linear range? X3 contracts? Nah... that would mean I captured 261% of the daily linear range, clearly impossible. I also played point, click, point, click with NQ today, but I felt Russell would be "safest" for me today and where I spent most of my time since Im "rusty" with REAL volatility.

    Now Im not here to toot my horn. I just want to remind that 3x Daily ATR is doable by just following the JH guidelines, in whatever way makes sense for your own way of trading.

    There is a thread here in ET called "Getting down and dirty is where the rubber meets the road". It has a lot of insight, just saying. And It helped me to "know". Here's a link... https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...ty-is-where-the-rubber-meets-the-road.195287/

    Anyway, Im not asking for critique of my annotations, or the like. If you have questions that you think I may be able to help you answer for yourself, I'll be happy to give my insights. On the chart, the Blue channel began on Jan 24th or 29th depending on guassian interpretation, and was accelerated on Friday. The yellow hz lines above are naked POCs, iow, nothing to do with JH. FWIW, I had 20 trades in RTY today.

    Hope y'all are doing well!
    And thanks!!

  122. Congratulations and thank you for posting your chart.

    Can you kindly walk us through some of your trades and state the reasons for each?

    It is likely that you agree that the Gaussian's on your chart do not adhere to the guidelines which were posted by the late JH or Spydertrader. Hence it is difficult to determine where you were likely to short the market and subsequently reverse or exit your positions.
  123. Hi srvr!

    Here is early morning. I didn't trade the opening bell. Was getting bearings in all the instruments I follow. I've added some comments, so lets be clear...the chart has now been modified IN HINDSIGHT. But much of my mods relate to your comment about NOT adhering to gaussian guidelines. Not as bad as you seem to think anyway.

    While I know I would lose the fight, I do take exception to the remark. I am the master of fractal jumping. As such, one of the tricks I learned, which works FOR ME, is to use gaussian tapes, and sometimes traverses. Longer term just confuses me, unless there is a well-defined, easily recognized through gaussian "JH channel". So given that I do not have 3 levels of gaussian on my screen, I do not adhere. But what I do with tapes and traverses, works for me, and for the mostpart, is within the "guidelines", but not always in real time. As long as we all get to the same conclusion/answer/place, all is good!

    This morning, the slalom against the RTL of the accelerated blue was a nemesis... until the somewhat sloppy R2R around 8:15. That trade then lasted about an hour, before reversing on non-dom, still within BO possibility of the blue. Around 10am pst, dom/non-dom became crystal to me.

    Trade On!
  124. Thank you for posting a few of your trades. No offense was intended in any way. Usually trading such strong trending sessions as today's via only the tape, can be highly problematic as lack of context (i.e. identification of higher fractals) may result in taking the wrong trades.
  125. Great idea to bring up Jack Hershey's method at this time, when most people are confused by the markets, even more than usually :)
  126. Hi baro-san.

    Nice to see you lurking around!

    Yea. Let "them" say what they will about JH and his stuff. When applied appropriately for ones trading style and experience, IF ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ELSE, the trader will stay out of trouble. That's much different than staying on the right side of the market, but a very important aspect of the teachings. Interesting times indeed!

    Trade On!
  127. I've concluded some work that needed done, and will be continuing working on the 10-case geometry and beyond in order to assist my own understanding, integration and needs for discovery.

    The 10 cases may be summarized like this (feel free to provide corrections/additions/debriefs):


    Some "annotations" above are meant to provoke thought, reflection and integration. Ie. we see there is "breath" in the 10-case geometry itself, with volatility ranging from contraction to expansion in 2 dimensions, as well as possible short-term anticipations for the next bars. The important parts are in the details and relationships above, but with no finalized conclusions (these are just idealized drafts of ideas).
  128. 2-bar combinations are miniatyre representations of multiple bar representations. I've updated an illustration provided by @Sprout earlier in these threads in order to expand my understanding and path to integration. This is also an idealized version of events with an attempt to bridge fractals through volatility (lateral vs non-lateral PA):

    the pattern gif 3 simples.gif
  129. When in doubt, also single bars may provide some additional clues to context. Here's a simple update to earlier attachment:

  130. Hi Simples.

    Im a little pressed for time right now but wanted to chime in.

    Regarding your "cases"... it's critical to remember that bars are the building blocks of TAPES.
    And every tape, as is every container must have P1, P2, and P3 established. The "case" document, the original and yours, is somewhat misleading as 1,2,3 can be created with a minimum of 2 bars, or it may require many bars, even for a tape. Once P3 has been established, regardless of number of bars to get there, there are 5 possible positions for tape continuance... Inside the RTL/LTL, On the LTL, outside the LTL, On the RTL, and outside the RTL. Looking at the bare minimum for understanding and recognition of the cases is necessary... In real-time however, bare minimum 1,2,3 requirements is just something that occurs when/as it does. What Im trying to say is do actual TAPE ANNOTATING. That will have much more teaching power for you than getting caught up looking for only minimum requirement occurrences in real-time. Each container, tape included, has only 1 set of P1, P2, P3 in order to move forward. Must never be forgotten
  131. Good effort Simples!

    A couple of things,

    1) The cluster of 4 internals (plus 10th price case) would be grouped as volatility contractions. The grouping of flaws is promoted afaik by spydertrader whereas Jack explicitly expresses that there are no flaws in the market's system of operation.

    2) StB and StR are kinda two-faced depending on the sentiment of the second bar. As currently illustrating in the diagram, they are BO's of the RTL on the way to the possibility of becoming an OB. StB, StR and OB's frequently signal an upcoming change in the trending tape.

    3)The Sym's third bar should be another IB to keep the pattern congruent.

  132. I agree, diligent tape annotating takes work and also reaps benefits like compound interest of the mind.

    To further clarify, I interpret what tiddlywinks is referring to as pt1, pt2, pt3 of price annotations which is distinct from the P1, P2, P3 volume annotations. (in the progressive expansion of the hershey universe.)

  133. Congrats tiddywinks!

    Also, another great thread link!

  134. Correct Sprout, pt1,2,3 of price/container annotation. Thank you for clarifying.

    And that leads back to my reply to simples...

    You see, it is very easy to confuse annotations, just as easily as it is to get confused by, lets call it minutia of the cases. Sprout mentioned several factors regarding the cases. I suggest annotating tapes as a drill. Each tape, like any container, has only one set of pt1,2,3. At the same time, all 10 cases can/may be experienced within a given container. And pt1,2,3 must complete as a volume sequence before a new pt1,2,3, and a new container can be defined.

    What I am trying to say is do things necessary to make real-time comfortable, confident, enjoyable, and profitable. Don't get bogged down with every little detail. Much/most of what JH provided are GUIDELINES, not rules. When you experience the appearance of things and associated activity in real-time, that's when you will learn what you don't know... and that's the same place where you know that you know lives!
  135. Starting up here, though not sure how to reconcile ABC-turns with P1 and P2's when volume doesn't follow DOM PA 100%.

    Using a new color scheme that I believe is easier to read bar-for-bar, based on other color schemes and ideas already presented earlier in the thread and some trial and error. Doji's are aqua and only properly established EOB (body <= 1/5 of range). They're not JH, but may make sense for this color scheme.

  136. The more you work on Jack Hershey's method, the more you realize that he told you so, but you misunderstood what he meant. He chose his words very carefully (as spydertrader did too). Jack warned people not to invent.

    From time to time, coming back to the basics, forgetting (almost) everything you think you learned, and (definitely) everything you added to the method, usually allows you to progress.

  137. Turns overlay as a layer by following the pt1,pt2,pt3,ftt,FTT,ve,VE,fbo,FBO,XO,RTL,BO points. Using parallel lines to create parallelograms which are the containers of price movement, channel annotations encapsulate the ohlc of the bars. Trends are profit segments that are a single to multiple bars long. Closes define the sentiment of the bar. Price cases define the forms of multiple bar combinations. Connecting the bars in two bar combinations is building a tape. When tapes expand to include other bars that require the rtl to be fanned then a channel is forming from the non-Dominant traverse. Channels require two traverses to form, Dominant and non-Dominant. They follow the fundamental fractal pattern of Dominant move, to non-Dominant retrace of that move and a return to Dominance with either extending or failing short of previous gains. This pattern can be seen down to the 5m intrabar and on up to the monthlies. Three is the minimum. A trading fractal, a faster one and a slower one. More channels create a broader dataset to draw from as well as signaling more trading opportunities.

    Regardless of the number of channels, long and short interlock.

    Lookin at the chart, we might have to get into degapping for accurate volume measurements.

    Your volume annotations lead us back to defining Failsafes. Failsafes being a design mechanism to eliminate errors and provide protection. The bookmark convention is a short green horizontal line that is placed at the high or low of the bar away from the movement of price. When this line is XO then we have a reversal of sentiment which is labeled as BM,rev. The second failsafe is our trusty rtl, our line in the sand. This line can be amended as a trend develops into segments, tapes into traverses into channels upon channels. A rtl is drawn with a ltl as parallel lines to connect pt1 and pt3 of price as one boundary and pt2 as the farthest excursion away.

    The rtl and ltl are navigational aides, they contain price and we know when our boundaries are crossed. When a rtl is XO then it's a BO. When a ltl is XO then it's a VE. This rtl was first defined in a two bar combination. The second bar is our pt3. This geometric point 3 is the trough of price.

    Applying the above to include all your tapes would support clarifying where the volume annotations are assigned.

    Place bar numbers for additional comments.
  138. i wouldn`t bother with the "cases".You`ll screw up 100%
  139. I "bother" with them :)

    The "cases" are a filter, essential in tracking volume, price, and dominance as well.

  140. This suggestion is descriptive of an event.
    This event has a type. The type is known as a mutually exclusive event. This event is mutually exclusive from the successful application of the basic operating principals of the JHM universe.

    Penrose triangles come to mind.

  141. NQ 15 minute, RTH only.
    I use as reference for longer, usually wide(r) channels/guassians.
    Blue broken line is tracking of a potential fanning. Why?... because BO of new up channel is non-conforming to an intermediate guassian(not shown), but the channel is conforming to the guassian of the bigger channel.

    Posted prior to RTH opening 2/15/18
  142. Reset
    Decided to find an easier period to get started with.


    Traverses seems confirmed by volume and tapes (to some degree).

    Period range: October, November, December bars

  143. Hi Simples:

    As @baro-san mentions, returning to basics is a good thing!
    Now, Im not a good teacher of JHM... although I can explain what it is that I do, and why, in relation to, or in direct opposition to, JHM I do it. Nonetheless, unless sitting side-by-side in some way, in real time, I will confuse most. Others here are more suited as JHM tutors.

    That said, I've attached a copy of the JHM volume elements and failsafe docs. I'm near certain you have these docs, and looking at your efforts, I think they are important as part of a return to basics. In particular, the volume elements T2P/T2F and the associated "kill" and "gate" criteria. Coupled with BO/T1 failsafe may be just the reminder needed for a profitable reset.

    As always, with all of my usual JHM caveats, I will try to answer any specific questions.

    FWIW, IMO... longer duration bars (ie several hours, daily, weekly, etc) are more difficult from a gaussian viewpoint.

  144. This might help.

    5x5 grid Hammer to Shooting Star.jpg 5x5 grid Shooting Star to Hammer.jpg 5x5 grid Shooting Star to Hammer Key.jpeg 5x5 grid Hammer to Shooting Star Key.jpeg

    There are two sheets that are composed of 5x5 bars in a 5x5 grid. Each bar represents 1min timeslice. This is an exercise in discerning Dominance and non-Dominance in a turn that is first observed in the 'shadow' of the bar as it builds.

    The 10 cases of price go through a transformation intra-bar. What the bar first presented is different than midway or toward the close. Observing changes in volume pace is an essential aspect of Jack's work. Calibration of volume pace comes faster when there are reference points of volume and how fast it took to build that volume as well as the path it took to get there.

    One might have to rotate the grid until it matches the key sheet paired with that grid. This is the sheet that Jack would call a pre-primary in his RDBMS. The 'what came before this' question. As one looks through the permutations of the bar as it traverses from endpoint to endpoint, imagine volume increasing or decreasing and what came before influences what will come after this current bar. This will support clarifying Dominant and non-Dominant sentiment as a bar builds.

    We use the initial 5x5 grid drill to create an alphabet. This alphabet can form words. The words create context.

    The extended 5x5 grid is like a hologram where the 1st column of a 5 bar group is composed of each bar as it leads it's own column. The columns and bars traverse sequentially from left to right.

    5 min, 5 ticks.

    This will create a reference grid in your mind if you take on creating extended grids for yourself or as a start trace these.


    five by five begins
    alphabet to words
    all sing together

    5x5 grid words into songs.jpeg

    note: grids rotate 90deg ccw, keys stay in portrait and overlay it's respectively paired grid. Each column of the grid has a spectrum of starting points for a bar and as a bar builds, any possible close prior to and including the 5th bar in the 5 bar group.

    This is an idealized scenario, by grouping bars in different like-to-like and contra variations, different contexts are discerned.

    The difference in Dominant turns and non-Dominant turns should get cleared up when doing the drill.

    Either turn can happen on increasing or decreasing volume. It's the distribution of volume pace and price rate of change intra-bar that we are calibrating by the placement of volume pace lines on the volume pane.

    This assists our unconscious in serving up 'knowing' during events of continuation and change.

    My view of the day:

  145. You'll have an easier time if you pick an instrument that doesn't have so many gaps.
  146. Would degapping work? When thinking about it, should be good for intrabar focus, disregarding nuances of interbar.


  147. When I first read about Jack’s view on degapping it was in the context of performing MADA on the ES - 5min. It was to create a carry over context from the previous day as a demonstration of the continuity of the market’s system of operation. Degapping is stressed as a way to create the slower fractal container above one’s trading fractal. He observed different characteristics in the PV relationship of rth vs the overnight session.

    One of the essentials is the catenary of volume that occurs during rth.

    Whereas in the overnight session, the foreign exchange opens are noticeable and there is no catenary.

    So to answer your question, I don’t have any personal experience testing JHM on eft’s so I don’t know but I would be confident that it should translate there as well.

    I know that he claimed the PV relationship works in any market, in any timeframe provided sufficient liquidity exists. (Spydertrader paraphrasing Jack)

    I know this stuff works on selected equities and on btc.
    I know that with ES futures and his RDBMS’s more explicit volume annotations, degapping is a requirement. So I suppose we could work through an eft example to prove that it does.

    In any case, you have to have diligence in building your tapes. Cherry picking what one annotates is not gonna produce the understanding of the principals to achieve the results promised. It’s a half-measure.

    Building tapes creates traverses. Two traverses form a channel. These geometric forms are related and influence each other. Every bar adds a datapoint to the developing context, every bar makes a difference - even internals which signal ‘wait’ if not in or ‘hold’ if one’s in a position.

    Bar2/3 and bar5/6 have an accelerated tape. Bar5 fans a rtl with each bar up to bar9. Bar16/17 is a short tape. The rtl of bar16 fans to include bar18/19. Then there’s an accelerated tape short, etc,..
  148. I don't know ;)

    Not on this fractal, maybe on the lower one!
  149. An update of my NQ 15 MIN REFERENCE CHART.

    The only container line updated is my "fanning tracker", the dashed blue.
    And I updated the gaussians... please recall, the gaussians are tracking the largest container...
    the high at the end of January, and the low of the recent pullback/correction/whatever it's being called. pt1 is the high, pt2 is the low, and we are moving to a pt3, and pt3 can not be higher than pt1 without negating/cancelling the container in it's entirety. That would make this entire sell-off a fanning of an up-sloping container, probably visible on a weekly or monthly time frame. Generally that's not useful for me, using a 5min or less time frame for trading.

    I also added simple fib retrace levels, and also the naked POCs that I use, the usage of neither are related to JHM.

    Now then, it is pretty clear (to me) the current up-slope container is "wrong". So at this time, this is an example that this stuff is ultimately self-correcting! Jack said many times you can begin annotating anywhere. Also, on the volume elements document, P1 (pt1) is "assigned." Just saying.

    Of note is the existing gaussian DV-B/IV-R rotation I'm annotating. There was IV on the 2/15 down move and it quickly faded. Thus far in the CURRENT 2/16 - 2/19 down move IV again is seen, but to a lessor extent. Today 2/19 was a shortened holiday session. But if you look closely, you can see a clear pt1,p2,pt3 on some fractal. The RTH open should be interesting. Also, assuming the BR rotation being annotated is correct, what volume segments must occur for change? Food for thought?

    Yes, I know... I've probably jumped a fractal or two already... Im the master!! :\
  150. Sierra Charts?

  151. Yup.
  152. NQ 15 Min Chart

    NQ 03-18 (15 Min)  2_21_2018.jpg

    NQ 15.Min deGap Chart

    NQ 03-18 (15 GAP)  2_21_2018.jpg

    Note the difference.
  153. Of course!!... Damn, I could have had a V8!!

    Seriously though... I mentioned my up-slope container was "wrong" in the post.
    I have not updated it... Still looking for pt3 of the "rainforest+sierra desert" sell-off container. Unless/until pt1 is broken the container is valid.

    In a quick glance of NQ weekly and monthly, it does appear the entire sell-off is contained so either option, a pt3, or a cancelled container of the selloff remains possible.

    Life is good either way... trading fast charts intraday... Takin names and kickin butt!!

    FWIW... Volume of the current down move today at noon pst, is confirming a pt3, so far. On the 15min.
  154. NQ 15.Min deGap was unable to make HH of Feb 7 High

    NQ 03-18 (15 GAP)  2_21_2018.jpg
  155. Yea.
    An ftt of the up-slope container, followed with a R2R breakout, all of which is properly defined with the volume sequence, and the necessary/expected PV for each event.

    Hey stepan7... Thanks for the charts and your input! Nice knowing other goofballs like me are still alive and, I'm just taking an educated guess, doing very well! :)
  156. Have my posts deleted and misrepresent if you must,
    {fortes fortuna juvat}
    but I am glad that you have finally embraced the deGap chart. You will learn a lot and if you get to the POINT of clarity you will realize that you do not need the deGap chart at all!!!

    I was at the NYC expo in 2007 and at the dive bar when all " the HACK " was interested in was collecting $60 entry fee. Ask questions! answers will come if they are relevant.

    No ego, No arrogance!
  157. Why are you calling Spydertrader "the HACK"?