I have done a lot of experimenting with tick and volume charts but always come back to the basic 5 min. chart. Time is an important factor in interpreting pace, etc. The consolidation periods are important information and on tick charts they are not so apparent. jmho. Do you imagine Jack has not looked at these? If there was an advantage I believe he would be using them.
as a counterpoint (not an argument)...time is incorporated into a tick chart...the faster a bar forms...the faster the pace all the pertinent information is still represented...price and volume...just a different lense. guess it comes down to using the proper lense prescription for your eyesight... the 5 min is blurry to me, the tick was more in focus. i was able to pull 4 pts out in 1/2 hour elapsed period (didnt trade the whole day) with essentially no losers (washes and under -.25 to .50. somehow i exactly saw the pv relation in action on the tick chart and i traded left to right and right to left...sidelined when things didn't match up (things meaning macd, stch, price and volume). (considering it was over a number of trades and that my losers were nill, i don't think it was just dumb luck...in other words i didn't just ride 1 simple trend). most 133 tick bars form in less than 5 mins, so you get more visual elements on the screen. I SEE how it gives me an edge in washing or staying in... i have not been able to do that trading rockets on the 5 min...not because they don't work, but because i don't SEE it. this was only partial of 1 day, so maybe it doesn't matter. however, since it got all cylinders firing in proper order in my brain, i'm going to be using it again (after the holiday week). my whole comment on the subject was not to suggest tick is better than minute, but that it's an alternative to look at if someone (like myself) can't SEE things and has honestly looked HARD to start with.
I did take a few looks. For me the 5 min fits with my personal mind functions. It has always been a case, as MAK says, of using your mind to think and the questions do surface. The Ancients have always made it a point of insisting that aq person's teacher is just there to verify that the learner is doing good things as he goes about learning. What I mean is this: the questions arrise as a consequence of considerations of the known and personal consciousness. If you look at the last 3000 years, there has been a consistent path of learning by learners who have the guidance of teachers who just dwell with the learner about aspects of the learning process. It is NOT a Q and A set of events over time. It is a process whereby a person learn to know how to know. With regard to different kinds of things some are important and some are not. Looking at the course of European culture and examining the ups and down for 3000 years, you get to see how there was a preservation of important things at all times. this was accomplished by preserving the learning process and not carving in stone or clay or on papyrus or felts leathers from animals. It was a case of imprinting in successive minds what is true as a consequence of learning by individuals doing it. There are notable examples in all fields. The more you go from temporal to non temporal considerations the more accomplished this process is. If you get to see persons who are accomplished in this process, they are very remarkable people. I would say that it is like a "seeking" kind of thing. There are several bridges in the world (ways of demonstrating)where and how the mind works at seeking. I can say, for example, in theoretical physics, that being in the same room with Peter gabrial Bergmann periodically for two years or so makes you different. He never had notes and he would never let a person work alone. Being with buckminster Fuller for three years off and on was also an intense thinking experience especially in terms of the physical universe and solving problems ingeniusly. The same was true with personal contact over time with E F Schumacher. Then there is the "think tank" world and further the "war games" world. The synergistic convergence process of barabara Marx Hubbard is very impressive as well. She attracted all the players of her era. I have coordinated periods of time for her with 100% concentration of the best the world offers problem solving circumstances second to none. Here the process came to the fore. The lifetime efforts of Ekistics (Doxiatis out of Greece) who marshalled a science of human settlements is unmatched even with efforts of the likes of the Club of Rome (I had a multidisciplinary role in adjusting coefficients at that time with those who worked on it). Moral Rearmament as an organization has worked tirelessly for more than a generation to deal with Africa's plight. there you saw Glennie Close's father, a doctor leader, wipe Ebola off the map in weeks as a consequence of mental effort and staff total life and death resolve. having specialty hospitals and associated landing strips made it possible as an outgrowth of "kitchen table" planning and great amounts of dollars backing resolve. It is like everyone has the opportunity to engage. Everyone has deep and abiding potential. The Essenes and Coptics never met but they wrote on paper the same words that guide stuff today. It is getting very clear that with the support of computers that people can learn to learn and know how to know very well and with great practicality. As MAK says it works. The clue underlying most of it all is that if a person can surface a conscious consideration. It begins with a question about the unknown (unknown to that person), then there will always be a solution that can be accomplished by that person. If you have a question, then you also have an answer that is true. I tried it out for ten years with all my students (Glennie Close was one in Greenwich as was the youngest Lindbergh daughter). I used increased aptitude in math as my learning standard. It is a tough test for measuring growth. We averaged a 1.23 sigma shift in aptitude over ten years with a 100% sample (a 6 sigma Gaussian curve of nonraw scores known as the SAT Math Aptitude Test). the student sample was from an academic orientation whereby the children of past attendees were given first preference (Two different schools over ten years)). Daily, students asked questions that they prepared for class. anything they understood by their self set homework assignments were not discussed. My job was to lead them to the answers to the q's they asked. In all courses each year, the year long courses were never finished any later than the end of February. My favorite of all classes was a combo of second year theoretical calculus and second year physics offered to sixth formers. Everyone has the potential to do all the questions they think up. I just have had the chance most of my life to be at the right place at the right time. I have always loved thinking up questions too. Here's a neat one. How can any person find out which Medicare Prescription plan (D)works best for them? We invented a sheet of paper that involves the CMS political solution. Its called Connecting the Dots. It would be so neat to see it engulf the country and give everyone the best offered to them in their locality. Its a doodling template. LOL. Harvard found out that 61 percent of the eligible population will not even consider it. My local paper is now printing one correction a day on their over 20 mistakes so far. We feel that is takes about 10 minutes to make the best and correct personal decision from what is offerred. I think it is hot stuff that Harvard and the US potiticians do what they do. As for me I am giving away to anyone who wants it a simple template that get the correct personal answer for anyone. My initial question was: how can an elderly person figure out how to gt the best personal answer? The answer is to connect the dots in up to 10 to 20 minutes of working at it.
Can anybody expand a bit on the following phrase: "retracement on that bar only" and the rule to which he refers in the following excerpt from the sexy idea thread: [The three conditional groups what I call "monitoring search" each apply to different price, volume settings. The points you raise deal with the setting that has the shortest time span. The choice is to deal with it on the "trading" fractal or go to the next faster fractal just momentarily and then scurry back to the trading fractal. For some reason ,you see most traders here go to the fastest fractal and just sit on it and lose the opportunity for continuing to make money under the more routine trading fractal monitoring. If you handle it on the trading fractal, you just apply one simple rule and the rule applies simply to retracement on that bar only. If you go to the next faster fractal, you simply take your routine trading rules there, make a a decision , and scurry back to the trading fractal. Failing to scurry back and slow back down, is certain death because of the excessive rapid fire signals that alarm and disorient any trader. What is lost on the faster fractal is the continuing synthesis that the trading fractal does for you to give you what the originator of the thread is looking for. It is the ebb and flow of the "active" trader groups that you must be in front of, not the individual trades that occur.]
mgin Have you studied the chart and trade sheet in the sexy idea thread? I found this very informative. It illustrates that sct is not an exact science with no losing trades but rather jockeying for position with lots of small losers and washes in the process. It has given me new incentive. I think maybe the only way to learn to turn the bike is to jump on the damn thing and go.
Jack, re: medicare perscription template. Pherhaps consider submitting that doc to AARP magazine as it has a large distribution to people most affected. Communication within their respective peer groups would provide even further distribution. These simplified questionairs can have great value to those most in need. Maybe the govt, would even start using it We won't hold our breath for that.
Interesting that you post this easy. It turns out we are dwelling in a similar place around now for some reason. IF2 comes to my mind when I reflect on "retracement on that bar only", especially considering the context of Jack's first post in the sexy idea thread....which is where I'm sitting indian-style this morning with a caramel machiatto and this week's replay buzzing along. In my quest to iterate the question of "how to turn" I'm reflecting on Jack's post (my thoughts in red):
I'm just seeing your latest response. In fact I have easy, and also other TDs Jack has posted shows the same thing. That's what gave me the gall to leave the setup approach alone and just go straight for SCT. What I haven't been able to reconcile is if Jack uses IF2 as a default rule or only when he wants to be lazy or if there is in fact an "excellent" sequence he uses at the turning points that we haven't hashed out here yet. The fact that no one has been able to integrate STR/SQU gives me the feeling that I'm still missing some monitoring points for the overlap. From what I've seen in my own practise of it, its not exactly precise at all. Sometimes you get the exact pt1 in the overlap but most times your an oscillation or 2 "early". So you use the sequences and other monitoring elements (bid/ask, cash, 2-pair) in the overlap to trim and tack again into the new trend? It's about trimming and tacking....? (tapping finger on desk).
I dont know how I missed that thread when it was running but I did. I wonder why it just stopped?It is a mindblower for me. Something clicked for me today. Jack is always commenting about how many times you go through the same price and I suddenly saw the revelance and my guts are in a knot.
Addressed in this post (I happened to be reading it this am)... http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?postid=348717#post348717