Bundle I have made some annotations in the chart to show some mistakes you were making in the video. Feel free to let me know if you need any more clarifications. IMPORTANT that you don't annotated the gaussian at forest level on one side and then annotate at lower (tree level) on the opposite side. <img src="http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1616105"> EDIT: When drawing gaussians (especially at forest level) you don't compare volume levels bar by bar, instead draw the trend of the volume bars on the traverse and retrace side. I believe spyder mentioned some like this back in March (i don't remeber the exact date).
This means that you trade 5 min tapes, and you have to monitor intra-bar for entries. You have to take entry / exit signals from tape RTL and BO of previous bar. You have to draw bar to bar gaussians, and follow intra-bar shifts in sentiment. At his level you'll probably have 20-40 trades a day, several of them washes even small losses due to slippage and commissions. You have also to be very quick in your reactions. If so, congrats!
The coarse (forest) level is 5 mins. Nowhere has any mention been made of using a 15 min chart to monitor. I don't recall seeing any mention of monitoring and trading on different fractals.
I'm telling you what's my understanding of this great method. Maybe this'll help you to understand it better. "Forest" level, as well as level 1, 2, ... are slower fractals than the 5 min tapes. You can "see" them on any chart speed 5, 10, 15, ... min. But you have to integrate in your mind the details you see. At "forest" level you should be satisfied with the entries / exits at that level, even if you monitor on the 5 min. Again, you trade on the fractal on which you see (Tampa) tapes.
I monitor and trade pt 3 channels on the 5 min chart. Perhaps they are the same as your "Tampa tapes" but I don't use the 15 min chart because I have no recollection in this thread of being advised to do so.
"Tampa tapes" are mentioned in Jack's writings. And again, on your 5 min chart you see the cumulative effect of all the price / sentiment fractals' superposition. You have to extract the info pertinent to your interest. As MakOsgu mentioned recently too, occasionally it helps to move to a slower fractal during your monitoring. But you don't have to. It depends of your mental "computing" capabilities. Don't get stuck in what it doesn't work. Try to find why it is so, and to find ways out of it. Don't get upset that it was not all given / explained to you in the best way. Get over it, and be open to the possibility that you didn't get it ... yet, and that you have to do the work for it.
As one looks at the forming bar and 'sees' a Pennant Forming, one need not have concern. In this particular example, you have an uptrend with a Volatility Expansion followed by (what appears to be in real time) a Pennant Formation, up until just before the close of the bar (where Price tics lower). Forget Volume for just a moment. If Price is headed one way, and then, shows an entirely opposite direction (tape to tape), certainly we can agree, this constitutes change. In this example, you may not have known until very late in the bar (realtime Price looked to form a Pennant then near the end, ticked lower), but such events are not always the case (one could say [if trading the tapes] that Price broke the up tape we had change, but that lesson involves trading further down the rabbit hole). One often knows much sooner than just before the close of the bar. Look at it this way: If your goal is to trade 'Forest Level' resolution, then why fret over Intra-bar entry? First look for change. Then determine what kind of change. Again, let's not worry when I see change, but focus instead on when you should see change. Again, in this example (See attached) everyone should recognize change based on a change in direction (tape to tape). Now, when Price breaks the low of the previous bar and has a lower high than the previous bar and you know you had an up trend, then certainly down marks a change from up. As a result, the last moment one should have known change exists (in this example) is when Price broke the low of the previous bar. Try it without looking at volume for a moment. Change is Change. No qualifiers attached. No context. Volume and channels add the context. Again, we aren't trying to determine what type of change we have. Flaws still represent a change - albeit a short term one. If one has difficulty determining the differences between continuation and change, one need not work to determine what kind of change. One needs to focus on whether change exists or not. After mastering this skill, then move onto determining what type of change exists. This is where we add context to determine what type of change we have. I hope you find the above helpful. - Spydertrader