Your custom is to not learn. You post what you may now believe. Your point of no return is rapidly approaching. In neuroscience, how the mind works is explained. The mind cannot erase. Faulty beliefs have to be blocked from being used as inference. I hope you cease in posting what you believe from your mind; if you do it will fade in importance. better still, if you take the first step to begin to learn, new inference will fall in place in front of the mistaken beliefs you now blab all the time. Most potential traders acquire stuff such as you believe. They continue to learn failure. finally, they leave trading and are no longer statistics, even. you are so mixed up at this point that you want me to respond to all your mistaken beliefs. they are unmentionable and must be blocked out by correct thoughful beliefs. You do not do learning about markets. Market learning comes in one form. the form is the same in any field of learning. DRILLING I suggested that you draw a bar to discover the "function" that comes from one characteristic of all bars for price. Granularity allows bars to take on 8 forms. how old must a child be to draw with a crayola these 8 forms. notice you are older and you cannot start at the smallest beginning. It appears you are very close to having a mind that is irreversably damaged permanently. Don't think about it. Find out the hard way like all those who came before you who ae following your path.
Considering the old statistic (which I have never verified, but seems reasonable) that 95% of market participants are suckerz who lose and lose and lose, it would be an easy jump to conclude that they vastly outnumber the 5% who win...... :eek:
Jack I am about to read your past posts. let me just drop this in while it is fresh in my head, AS volume increases price increases as volume decreases price changes as volume increases price goes down there is 2 sides to the market 2 players. there is minority and the majority the minority are in control one would not be well served if he was on the side of the majoity, the majority and minority switch sides. there some more will look em up. majority comes to buy we do watch, we can detect when the majority has lost steam volume goes down mojority switches side price reverses. majority does not control price minority does. so./.. maybe minoriity comes in buys they start the trend. the majority follow. and bring in volume. the majority leave lowering volume ... minority and majority cant be on the same side. so we are not waiting for the majority to help push with us. to enter at the highs or lows we must be restricted to trading in the low volume... Ill try to make a list, of the given rules. Im resisting an ilogical answer. But I must remember that a trend is within a trend high volume in one trend is not high volume in another trend brb
Jack, Your Checks, if accurate for all types. Should put me in an undefinable area. I imagine this is the case as time is not an ....(Something).. to analyse the market. (which is what I do). I do not follow your rules. I understand that to deduce would be to follow the given laws. I follow a few and then try to fill in blanks. BUT If I can follow a few, I can deduce. I just don't . What is the probability I can deduce better then most when need be ? Do we use probability? Can we put an X in this column ? I am lazy and cant write on a paper with a crayon of the opposite colour like a 5 year old or grade 5er can. So I am stupid or lazy or not serious or uncommited. OR I am unfocused. Does Excel deduce this ? It should. People can be unfocused for many reasons. If your excel sheet uses CW as a way of classifying me, then the probability I can do this is the same as the probability that you hold a lottery ticket for me. That is why we are deducing It is only a matter of time till I have a bad morning night or day (as /I seem to be here reading your other posts most the time) and say something that will tell give you needed information to make a conclusion. I probably can crack the given puzzle in an hour or two if I had a pen and paper. Even if it meant that 25% of the information is missing. I did not know what orthogonal was before hand I did not respit the idea of # of trades vs number of transaction. It was brought in by CW If I am being judged in my current situation (one of which I do not pick up a crayon) then please stop. Its not fare. If you must, you can stop replying until I state I am ready. I did not expect you would respond to the last post (in this thread) as I, in your eyes, "forfieted" (hence the worse then usual use of the English language) It is just a puzzle within a puzzle within a puzzle and clearly the obstacle is just a pen. Information in the right order yields to yes no answers and the answer isn't even a answer, it is just putting a picture to yes no statements that can allow us to see some overlaps that we may use to make new laws. Continuous Curiosity is a good trait, it is the fuel to answer/solve (any method). It is not a replacement for a goal as it has to be continuous. Generally, to assume one will go from A to Z based on curiosity alone is a bit unrealistic. A bit of pre CW(probability) thinking would be needed for a mind to be in that state. A friend solved the rubuicks cube. Time was spent before the ideas of algos was given, curiosity drove him to that point. The thought of his friends watching him do it under 2 mins was the goal/pay off that took over when curiosity died. He did what no one around him did, he was seen as smart. We know there's nothing smart about it. Its just following and remembering, Maybe new algos can be made. It is in fact following, The magic was the idea to use algos. Our friend lost interest cause in his hart he knew he was just spiting out formulas. Goal was met. Curiosity was not quenched. Now he may hold the record for least number of moves needed to solve the cube. So again, Id like to bounce ideas around, especially yours , but if it is to be judged I'd rather not play like this. (and your work does involve creativity) Week 2 is done, one thing was asked, no progress was made. No attempt to get the loot, just ramblings and problem solving in traditional ways. My brain is here to solve problems. I do not want answers, I want problems I do not have a goal or expectations of hope. This is my therapy it is probably consistent with last years posts; spurts of ideas with no goals followed by months of silence. Usually spurts are short lived and this one you should be proud of. One can time my race against others but I just may be more interested in the track (for future reference) then racing. Can it be deduced that I am not going to win when I do run? I trust your excel sheet checks for annomolys. And does not have all possible combinations of possible answers defined. (adding a screen for coherency should also be added) Treat a prisoner bad, offer him a 5 course meal out of the blue, hunger and curiosity of taste will poison the ones you seek, but the smart one will have decided on what he eats. both die one hungry, one full. Even Amway gives more then one path of duplication you can sell or you can build. The assumed benefit of this is NOT going to come in time for me, not this round ( It is not deduced. It is a forced reality I decided via CW as I have responsibilities much bigger then anything here including myself). I hope you appreciate any focus given here, it should be seen as your work is interesting to me ( i hope that counts for something). It really is amazing how far you led me even after the acceptance that even if there is hope it will not be in time. I seen you post in a quantum thread. You also refer to formulas that are cutting edge and do not seem to be used for trading but other physical random movement. You must then know the facts: All probability can be seen The path of the outcome is chosen by a "observer" Knowing what will happen makes for good trading. I hope you crack that or at least share a vision like mine. Its always nice to read your posts. But I do not want you to regret your time with me or deduce me. Do as you must if you must but do so in style, not CW style. expect more deducing related thoughts if the last one was closer to that. But focus is not to solve untill I have decided to pick up a pencil and write down your laws.
Also jack, I am looking at the work you asked about. The sheets, It led me elsewhere and that may lead me else where. Either way I am picking up information. What would be the maximum amount time one should spend on a post ? and should one flow down a thread or across many threads? There is also simplified versions. I have one. Is finding ones way some thing one should deal with on their own? when I am stuck should i just move on. I feel like I have to cut and past every line to start to get an idea. Like I have one title called minority with bits and pieces and then one called granularity. just when I think I am putting it together I see another post one another thread that has more information. Is it supposed to help me ? do i work updown right left, search, other simplified versions. ? Or is there a link ? Thanks
So do I proceed by reading the books you asked me to ? or working my way through the 6000 posts to find all the rules the markets plays by? Just to be clear, Once I have decoded all 6000 posts I should be making money in a bout an hour ? You are in a certain mode for this year, Should I aim at understanding 150-200 posts a day so that I am 1 hour away from making money before years end. (oh and do you even read what seems uninteresting, hope you had a HB) Or will you change modes before that? Is hope or effort or the idea of a pay off needed for one that reads as bad as he writes? There are rules that are not fare, FIFO is a rule there are 2 sides 2 participant players rule makers majorities and minorities some of theses can be subsets of others or different names. smart and stupid money. and some that do not use entry and exit CW thinking. fast lanes slow lanes market orders and limit orders stops are hidden but can be calculated in T and/of sales and maybe an unknown amount of more. ----------------- ALL Information to understand this concept may or may not YET be all available ----------------- ECNS may or may not have rules. FIFO, being a rule, may or not be fare ECNs make money off fees (the bad make money off fees) ECNs are bad, they must be represented in here as people. Is an ECN a side a rule maker that does not play but profits off others unjustly or fraudulently. Again a key point previously mentioned as a side note pops up. There was a day not too long ago where an annomoly occurred in the market. Programs don't make annomolies. CW would lead us to analyse this day orders where things were "miss routed" (from one ECN to another ???) what missrouting would cause and order to be matched at that low a price, who had an order that low and what was his characteristics or volume. Was the transaction unfarely allowed to stick. or was it called back What premises can you offer about ECN's are they appropriate at this time?
K, my TL's are terrible I am sure. New to them.. Being friday I thought it be a bit creative. After hours of figuring out best way to tweak things... 1. We see a drop in volume (red bar at the bottom.) 2. We see a huge spike in rate of volume ! only then does the trend change, as mentioned, 3. we can see this inter trend too The problem with the non time related charts is that you don't see a change in volume. I guess if it were live instead you would notice it by how fast bars open and close, Clearly this was all drawn unjustly in hind sight. I know very CW ish .. Its 3 am on Friday this is my recreation, The first trend does not seem as clear, but there still is the bit about looking at price to see if we can take a measure of the volume to be thought about. Kinda cool though to see it without having to dig for it !
Im gona try to trade this, stop me if you can ! Now we need to add the 10 types if 2 bar formations. They are in list form for memorization. But they are not just random. They represent a smaller time frame (tick frame) channel. A 2 bar long is probably a nice trending channel on the 1 min chart(tick) Then there is the V price A/d formulae. taking a measure on price to see if we can take a measure on volume ?