Went short intrabar on bar 2. Would have liked to enter at the high of bar 2, but kept holding out, hoping it might get closer to 28. <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2287674>
Jack made a lot of references to a 'critical path', namely PVT then SCT. There can only be so many reasons for this, none of which I believe are an inherent quality in the type of instrument being traded. PVT uses just the P-V relationship. No adjuncts. It is based on EOB information. The daily/30 min bar is not glared at intently as it forms. There is no urgency. The trader really does have all the time in the world. There is (ideally) no emotional investment. There is a repeating cycle of positive reinforcement. Having elected to remain at the beginner level for a year, I've decided to go one better, and spend 2009 replicating the positive qualities of a PVT foundation. Eschewing rigid rules to develop a deeper and more flexible understanding. Remaining on primarily EOB data until my two learning priorities have been addressed; clarity of MODE for every bar, and granite certainty in WMCN at all times. To this end, I've set a sound alert to trigger when there are thirty seconds left in the bar. More than enough time for annotation and MADA. Eliminate urgency. Eliminate emotional investment. Build coherence and trust. With the added advantage that there are suddenly over five hours of downtime a day! Once the two procedural goals have been achieved, then can I return to intrabar monitoring.
In failing to acknowledge sequence completion, missed the SOCs. <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2287742>
The impact of late reversals never ceases to surprise me, as I always forget to take both sides of the equation into consideration, so to speak. A timely first reversal at 820 would have meant +11 points rather than +4.
Reversed long. Missed the first chance, and couldn't gauge WMCN on an intrabar level so missed the closest thing to a second chance too. <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2287919>
That next bar explained why the geometry didn't add up. Great second chance too. Anticipating a lateral walk out of the short traverse.
What I can't work out is whether the current long traverse is the non-dominant of a short channel or the dominant of an adjusted long channel. We did get a potential point 2 of a short channel, on IRV beyond the long channel RTL, though there was no subsequent IRV. And it certainly feels as though there's going to be another attempt at a long range expansion.