Spyder, so you pretty much hit the ground running in SCT. What if you're just a natural at this stuff and all of us un-naturals are just wasting our time? Also what do you have to say to guys that haven't gone all into this system? I mean I'm still stuck in January. But if I can just nail one or two ftts a day for 2-3 points per contract average per day and have a pf of greater than 2.0 than that's fine for me. I think porgie was used a channel system based on SCT but he only used what he was comfortable with. He used to say all the time that he had a 100% no risk system. But I doubt he was all-in at all times. I think he just took some the highest probability trades and was happy with that. Do you agree that its okay to be content with just a few points per day or is edge trading mentality so bad in the long run for financial and mental health that its never worth persuing no matter how good the money seems to be.
I believe the confusion that I (and possibly others as well) have over identifying FTT's in real time stem primary from the following scenarios. These are based on using the coarse tools. Utilizing the S/S and DOM / TS is not presently feasible. 1. The development of flaws in a trend - specifically stalls but also HVS's. Stalls in particular seem to resemble FTT's very well. 2. The break of a RTL and then reversal of price (thereby creating a fanned out channel) causes numerous head fakes and subsequent reversals that are based on confusion / uncertainty. 3. The fine resolution / fractal nature of trading where FTT's, FBO"S and BO's can occur in very short time and distances. Where the anticipation of something happening does happen, but only on a much smaller fractal then I am prepared to respond to. 4. This point is most closely related to the previous point. Volume patterns appear to indicate the development of FTT's - which they often do, but again on a small fractal - causing numerous reversals and added frustration and uncertainty. 5. The enormous intra bar volatility (using 5 min. bars) causes me to reverse several times during each bar. Obviously I don't know if these are the specific issues that affect others, but I thought I would throw my thoughts / issues out there.
Spyder has commented from the beginning that you will find it very rewarding, even if you just trade at the forest level. Trading is an individual sport; it is akin to skiing -- there is only you and the mountain. You carve every mogul if you can, and pass up those you can't. Nobody needs to concern with who is doing all-in or who is doing SCT.
I'm wondering if focusing on identifying FTT's is really the correct mindset. Part of me currently believes seeing a "candidate" FTT in real-time is only a part of the process, and maybe not the most important part. Bear with me as I try to explain what I'm thinking... For example, assume price is in a down channel: 0) price has not hit the LTL 1) volume just made a R2B Gaussian peak. 1.5) the current R2B peak is much smaller than the previous R2B peaks (PV) 2) price has just made a double bottom (DB) 3) a wall on the bid was recently observed 4) STR was recently observed 5) a 2-pair spike was recently observed (tic chart) 6) price is starting to retrace In other words, a perfect "candidate" FTT signal, right? But time will only tell is this FTT turns out to be a true Forest FTT (trend change), or just brings price back to the RTL (retrace), or something else (flaw, lateral, etc). And the amount of time needed could take several bars or more to confirm this. One can anticipate what's next but can't predict the future from any given NOW, even a "textbook" NOW as described here. It seems to me that if one enters a trade at this point, the actual management of the trade might be more important than the actual entry. Is the process of being able to monitor for continuation and change more important than being able to spot the FTT itself? Part of me thinks so. Maybe I've been too focused on FTT's as entry signals (or new point 3's). Is being able to manage/execute change and continuation the key? Maybe this is what Spyder was relating to on his last post, maybe not, LOL. That said, one still has to execute trades. FWIW, spooz
I would tend to agree with Spooz. When I used to sit and keep looking for FTT's, everything looked like FTT's. When I sit and watch for continuation or change, constantly asking myself what must come next, and being aware on what resolution level I'm on and need to be on; then and only then, the FTT's just sort of pop out at you.
Wow, This thread sure got active, especially for a summer Saturday. This is great. It appears to me like most flaws start out with what I think is an ftt. The what must come next provided the key to how to handle these but often the next bar will be shifting from red to black several times before completing, making it difficult to know which side to be on sometimes(at least for a bar or two). The str/sqz and DOM-T&S may help in these situations but I have yet to make sense of these consistently. As for the tic chart. After watching it yesterday for the first time, mainly in the last 2 hours which I did a screen record. I focused on the tic gaussians at times of change, at least what I considered possible times of change, like when there was decreasing volume on the YM. I found many clear signs at times I usually had trouble. I've gone over part of the video and after an ftt and a gaussian shift on the tic chart to confirm it, I could see the volume on the tic chart decreasing, leading into a gaussian shift and dip or stall signalling continuation. I found this tool very enlightening. Also noticed at times of anticipated ftt the tic gaussian never shifted signalling continuation. Am I putting too much focus on this tool? It was all I could do to pay attention to the es, ym and tic charts. Didn't have time to look at the other tools. Maybe due to the market. It was far from a typical summer day. At least from previous years. I look forward to more time with this tool and hope it doesn't drag me too far down the rabbit hole. I also found the comment by PointOne about rethinking the channels during that period under discussion interesting. Going back and drawing them differently(probably more correct), made a big difference in spotting things. Either way if you go back to the what must come next, you should end up on the right side. Learning this has been a slow process for me but the light continues to get brighter. Spyder has done an excellent job of pacing the syllabus and it all makes sense now why he structured things the way he did. I would find it interesting to see a screen shot of your layout on the laptop Spyder. I trade a good part of the day on a laptop and find my screen space shrinking. On my desktop I have several monitors so this isn't a problem but for those on a laptop or single monitor it seems like a squeeze.
This discussion of the basic principles caused me to review the definition of an FTT. It is described early in this journal as "the turning point of a trend, and more importantly, a change in trend direction". However, the trend change is only manifested at the moment of the R2R or B2B. If we don't get an R2R or B2B then we just have a flaw, hence the difficulty of distinguishing between a flaw and an ftt. Anything prior to the R2R or B2B is just anticipation of a trend change. So where does the change actually occur?