There are many successful approaches. From what I read of your posts, you could be failing to grasp any one or most of them. This is very common. Your "personalizing" of what you believe I said is a tradegy for you. Elsewhere, Intradaybill does the same with respect to another approach. Intraday bill attaches "induction" to a genre of approaches. Induction certainly cannot make any approach workable, ever. Intradaybill believes scientists use induction to prove things. For you, you are deploying degrees of freedom determined by a vertical examination of whatever. This is another form of induction based non science. Would it be possible for a portion of potential traders to actually reason through the basis of a market's operation? It is a rare opportunity for anyone to go through. Since you are passing it up and focusing on a translation containing fewer words, you will continue to get the consequences. It is the same for how Covel missed the boat when he interviewed many many people and didn't ask the correct questions. They all played him and he went away happy. At one time, interest grew with respect to dancer who traded as an anateur. First off he was interviewed nd then asked by another financial organization to write a book. He did "box" trading and used Western Union to communicate to and from his broker. No one in the financial industry got his message then or now. At that time making a milliion dollars trading stocks was not part of the financial industry. SKO has asked me to explain how to keep making all the market's offer and not have any mental turmoil while doing so. So I shall. I do believe Ammo looked up "orthogonal" and maybe he "coonected"; Wide talesz didn't "connect". Three people. One wants to vut down turmoil, another may see something in "orthogonallity" of hypothesis which are "like Kind", and lastly, a person has a principled system pass in one eye and out the other. Intradaybill remains in the dark. Trends have two non opposite but orthogonal conditions. Anyone's heritage and training does take him down the opposite trail. Could it be possible for such a person to not think in opposites for making money? The answer is a resounding NO!!!! for most of the world. Wide talesz is sticking with NO I cannot. Ammo looked up (see it is UP to look) orthogonal to deal with the trend states continue and change. Covel does not know this as yet. Atrend contines and then comes to a period of "overlap" and then springs forth as a new independent trend. Trades make the most money if done as I will explain to SKO using cases. CW uses TA to do BO's of RTL's and their failures to BO. Both are lagging types of trades. The beginning of overlap is when to maximize trading. Here is when continue ends and change begins. Change ends when the BO of the RTL occurs. Volume tells you when the left and right side of markets is occurring. Wide Talesz is stuck (by his beliefs he decided to put and keep in his mind) with up/down and cannot adjust to another mental construct called left/right. If you look at a box it has ends. Ends are formed by events. What are the other two sides used for? Wide talesz uses them for guessing support and resistance. For the mind it is tough for a person to coordinate his timing with price. I suggest this as what is oging on because, in posts, I hear a lot about timing. Some funny posts come from Lucrim. He actually thinks (or just posted) that he wants to see the "equations" for leading indicators of price. A parallelogram is a trapezoid as has been switched to. Do the parallelograms have tops and bottoms? Yes. They have names: RTL and LTL. respectively. BO's are always on RTL's regarding late profit taking on trends. The Depression we are in is not going to have a BO on the RTL for 10 to 12 years. But what about the LTL of the last move of this Depression? As it steepens, the LTL will be breached four times and each breach has a name: VE. VE means the volatility of the trend move increases (Expands). If a person can draw containers and can recognize there are four parts, then he can use this to make the optimum take for each profit segment. Thus we have eliminated guessing tops and bottoms and they are replaced by FTT's and faster ftt's and fastest ftt's. All involve left/right brain power. Directions of trends are always from right to left. This is called the dominant direction. trends all have three moves as determined by deduction. Can anyone go through this deductive process. NO!!! Read all the posts in ET. Most are telling. People who post mostly confirm they are using induction and the associated inductive non reasoning to do trading and formulate the equations (See Lucrim) of their non reasoned playing the markets. Go back to the garden of EDEN where the first trend occurred. It was on the fourth day that God invented point 1. This market move was the first move and it was good. So God called it dominant since that was the way he was lining up the troops for his campaign. Later, point 2 occurred. Points were good. To get to point 3 it was required to retrace and this is called a non-dominant move. With three points there, an acorn lying in the poop sprouted and said "Gee I'm a tree" Geometry was then put to use to contain price. Deducing that three points can form something required a lot of deduction. A triangle could come to mind and perhaps it is not possible for anyone the think out of the triangle. to be fair, it probably doesn't work out that an uneven number of supports and resistancecould be assigned if a neutral bias is maintained. But lets face it Adam and EVE did not have girls. To deduce that a parallelogram is most reasonable is a tough undertaking. But I assume that the constant volatility is a good choice unless told otherwise. Bookmarks were invented by religious monks much later but that is another story. Look at deducing that a dominant move and a non dominant move can set the scene for a slower trend that could come to fruitition (garden of EDEN talk later shortened to fruition). Imagine the non dom ending at point 3 and an RTL could be put in place. Then think of dominance returning since non dominance is not there anymore. What kind of a guy or gal is God? He or She is not an ad nauseum type. So we get to deduce that this slower trend made of three sub trends so far, COULD be considering wrapping it _____. That is why the FTT was invented. A dominant going from point 3 will or will not get to the LTL. this is a binary situation and is dictated by the fact that the market demands a binary math only. No equations are allowed. there is not even continuous functions in the space. Why? The tickedness of the markets. Cain and Able did wickedness. (one was dis-abled) Trends do tickedness. A dominant trend move goes from point 3 and only gets so far; price fails to traverse to the LTL. We are in the middle of a perallelogram. We take the profit segment from point 1 to FTT. We reason that if the FTT happens, then it is the baginning of a new trend. So we call it point 1. And use clean page 4 to assureourselves that point 2 MUST be outside the trend that just ended. Since this is deducable, then it is also true their is only one pattern in markets. And so it is cast in stone our paper of choice. Most people can't understand this type of foundational reasoning. Certainly, we have to include the 10 cases and plan for VE's. So we do and it all ends happily ever after. See one pagers. Moral: left/right and hold/reverse replaces up/down and entry/exit.
You have everything you need. Now, you "put the pieces together". Adding a contract every 30 points can be reasoned through. It goes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Only once in life do you have to double your money to add a contract. Then it gets easier. You say: "However, the market sometimes could behave in the space where we do not have sufficient knowledge and skills to handle." If this is true for you, sideline until it is no longer true. Also, consider doing a log so what you say never happens. All bars form the same way and then they become one of the 10 cases. On TN we havea container for the forming bar. To make is possible (simple) for TN programmers we campaigned tirelessly under they used a yellow box. Later we tricked them into a blue box by a cut and paste effort that worked. You will notice almost no other platform has complied with our demands. Cool, we have an edge. So we have a space for behavior as you pointed out; it is yellow. And you have annotated according to the pattern to have three observable interlocking nested fractals. The companion to all of this is your differentiated mind where inference exists. this set of inference matches one-on-one with the elements of the set that you see. What you see is a very small set. So I may mention all of the elements in the set in this brief post. At 300 seconds on your chart a new bar begins. It is a tick tall and in a yellow box as tall as the prior bar. The yellow box is in the three nested parallelograms. could it be any spookier or mystifying? No, Never. But I will amplify. In the smallest fractal container which you prjected into the future, the yellow box will stay inside or not. If not, fan. If, hold. Well for some of the cases the yellow box disappears. It does this the right way or the wrong way. Write in your journal how each case does it the right way or the wrong way. Then scan the page and post it here. Soon you will have an ftt on the fastest fractal. Then you draw another fastest trend segment using two adjacent bars. If you are still inside, and the yellow box goes all the way to 0 seconds, then squish and annotate. Do the same for blue boxes (laterals). As you do the annotating of MADA, make sure you add small brief notes to read that tell you where you are in each nested fractal's series of movements. Also for VE's remember what you wrote in your journal to accelerate that given VE no matter what level you are on. Gradually, you can work up to multiple accounts all at the capacity of the market. Also you can trade point to point on faster fractals. So now let us look at the ftt bar. It can be an ftt or FTT on any other fractal that is slower. Two thrid moves one inside the other and on a thrid move of the FTT fractal. This is a majic time because you are going to reverse and bookmark the FTT. What Happens? you pull out your MAC PACE charts to know what to expect in the size of things. Go across the PACE row and find the peak of the gaussian for a given forming bar. Drop over to the DOM and write the value of the WALL in your log. during the bar when the values get hit for the three things, reverse and write down the data and look at the new level of realized profits. Notice some new unrealized profits begin to accrue. After the first 1,000 times of doing these difficult things, you will have "put the pieces together". Notice for each five minute bar in your log there are up to six rows. Notice at the end of the day your log is 10 to 12 pages long and all of your accounts have traded according to the preformance of the market on that multiple of the ATR. (3 to 6 times).
Up / down is the only breakout filter I could figure out how to code up. Volatility with respect to the trend line you construct with point 1 and 3 is my tell that a trend is accelerating or coming to an end. And yes it's a fractal, and yes I mean orthogonal........
so ltl and rtl are left and right or upper lower trendlines,ftt is failing to to bounce back up or down to the upper/lower tl in the present channel,at this point,you start a new channel,this is what i am deducing from your post, the ve,volatility expansion,i'm miffed,is that the same as a direction change,and are you saying we will make it thru this fed printing for another 10-12 years before any serious market damage,if you are you've answered my question about you using this on weekly ,monthly.yearly charts
Since my last few charts have been so well received , I thought I would continue the series. Jack has said many times to pay attention to all market orders greater than 50, so here is a de-gapped chart with a cumulative delta volume filter of trades > 50. So easy, even a p/a trader can do it.
That is about as much as I ever figured out from Hershey's stuff. In studying the FTT I discovered that oftimes it fails, probably Hersheyites are able to interpret it further by the context of the next larger fractal or maybe they just take their losses and go their merry ways. That will not work for them on a day that continually signals reversal but doesn't reverse, that killed a lot of traders in the 1987 meltdown, they averaged down until they had nothing left... I found ways to rule out the failing FTT's before they occur via the context that don't involve channels on the larger fractals. I trade the entry/ bracket-exit methods though, not in-all-the-time and that largely because I'm devoting my efforts to automated trading..
could you tell me where can i find "chapter 4 of Harris" from this thread http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1587604&highlight=dom+or+wall#post1587604