zdo

Blowfish, wanted to take a moment and let you know I've not been ignoring your posts. re “different argument” and “non sequitor “ Please forgive me (and virtually everyone else herein) for not having or taking the time to form good, sound “arguments” and or provide concise definitions. If you’ll check, I think you’ll find I was carrying on several simultaneous, rather ragged, conversations and only occasionally mashing them all together to form those non sequiter. These conversations have been about 1) whether markets are or are not fractal. I say not. Theory… ‘fractal - like’ does not fractal make. As above, so below – NOT! 2) that if we just loosen the definitions and get practical and realistic then we are in effect trading fractals. I posited if the ‘serious’ fractal traders aren’t really trading fractals, then no one else really is either. Interspersed in that conversation, I kept making the point that an ‘occasional fractal’ does not fractal make. 3) (closely related to 2)) that fractal in the name makes it really fractal. I say not. And the “F word” is still being used all over the place… the label is co – opted, corrupted… not quite sure why you were correcting me on this part. re: “no need to loosen or tighten definitions” I agree. robertm asserted that some of us were way “over complicating” it. I was questioning his loosening the definition to just ‘repeating setups’. (see 2) above) “Btw. no one has suggested 'everyone is trading fractals'” True – no one really has. But in the ‘arguments’ between robertm and myself, it appeared to me that he was saying if we ‘simplified’ things enough, if we loosened the definitions enough, then we could all happily be trading fractals. Statements like “Markets are fractal in so far as we can see the same patterns (setups) repeating regardless of instrument and time frame, allowing for a singular system approach…” etc. I pushed both our arguments out to the extremes – everyone is ‘trading fractal’ vs ‘no one is trading fractal’ to make my points that occasionally fractal (repeating setup) do not a fractal market make, etc re: “One of the few practical applications I can think of, that is quite accessible to the 'layman' is the polarised fractal efficiency indicator… It's an interesting concept.” Have you looked at the formula lately? Seems to me, while Larson’s idea may have been catalysed by Mendelbrot’s work, in real life it could have just been named ‘polarized efficiency indicator’ period… more co-opting of an obtuse ‘new’ word… more F word And re: “Just because F word used to be used all over the place mainly to market dubious systems a whole bunch of other 'experts' just dismissed the whole discipline” If you will check back through my posts in this thread, I think you’ll find I have been saying the same thing. While a whole bunch of other 'experts' have just dismissed the whole discipline (mainly because it’s not their niche), if we could take an accurate poll I would bet the collective consensus is that markets are fractal. My conclusions that markets are not fractal are based on ~ 25 years of observation and trading of the ‘above’ and the ‘below’ and the ‘in betweens’ of representations of the market. They are not based or founded in math. I only offer these opinions as an alternative – not as ‘the’ truth.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaAjL2ybLVg]YouTube - Research Summary US Futures Trading - TABB TV[/ame]

Sure. No problem. Just go to US Special Forces Tracking and Counter-Tracking, TC 31-34-4, Sep 2009 - Wikileaks :spam:

Fractals is a niche. An obviously and increasingly corrupted one. So far, this thread has not been talking about gaining an edge. It has been about fractals – their presence(s) and qualities. If I don’t think your .01% of Quants & Algo's are actually finding and trading ‘fractals’, then I certainly don’t think the other 99.99%, are, more casually, but still ‘purposefully fractal trading’. The drift of your posts is that everyone is trading fractals – just so long as we loosen up the definitions enough. The drift of my posts is that no one is really trading fractals, regardless of the purity of the definitions being applied...

Wow the grab bags at this fractal party are amazing – reach right in! No telling what you’ll pull out. BF, check around. You can find stoopidity in any and all my posts. So re “What is 'the real auction'” The real auction is the instantaneous objective and projective whole market for an instrument – irrespective of the millions, no billions, of individual constructs about it. (Maybe TL is not a good circle in which to use the term. It may be just as atrocious a buzzword as ‘fractal’ is becoming… yada yada) All I’m doing here is expressing my personal doubts about the whole market fractals thang and my reservations that there are widespread efficiencies in pursuing ‘fractal’ centered trading methods. (And yes, THE auction may be comprised of multiple simultaneous auctions. Size matters. But, I also don’t see the small players and the big players in any ‘fractal’ relationships there either btw) The main point of all my posts in this thread is: In the representations of THE auction (be they barcharts, timeframes, travel, time series, wave counts, whatever…) my limited brain has NOT found fractals. It has found ‘fractal – like’ and ‘transient neighborhoods of fracticality’ – but not real fractals. In resistance to closure, I’m not going so far as to say they can’t be ‘quantified’ - but it gets downright quizzical to me if it only shows / if you can only find ‘fractal’ in certain types of representation of the auction and not the others. My rough summation is that ‘fractal’ (not the co-opted buzzword type but in the purest mathematical sense ) is just not likely to be as effective ‘empirically’ in the real world as some noobies might ‘want’…

Many Thanks, flydutchmen. Looks good at first glance. Will take a look at it later today. PS Something in the pictures and frames prevented me from getting over to the Thanks button

robertm I get what you’re saying but it’s …Way under complicated A ‘similar pattern’ does not a fractal make. That’s just co-opting the word for a catchy buzzword like Bill Williams, Jack Hershey, etc try to do … obviously, with much more success than is good for the trading ‘public’ btw Real fractal work don’t allow the occasional spotting of ‘one’ and letting the rest be noise, etc. The ‘people see what they want to see’ line is getting tired too – especially the ‘want’ part. If I saw what I wanted to see my net worth would be in the billions and so would yours… (my gift to you… happy holidays already) We routinely ‘see’ within the constructs of what we are predisposed to ‘see’- but that is not a necessity. We can at any point choose to improve at seeing what is...

motorway, Thanks for your post. Unfortunately after an as yet undefined number of wash and rinse cycles in the real world, we'll find that “end to end” is ultimately just as artificial and unworkable as “timeframes”

bf, Maybe check to see if Allstate will work with you on this... like if they will grandfather you in on 'accident forgiveness', etc...

You're missing something or you're jerking my chain I "made up my mind" in favor of fractals long ago... conceptually, market fractals are so 'wired'... I liked what I 'saw', still do ... but extended, actual experiences have forced me to unmake up my mind... there are neighborhoods of tf's that are 'fractal' but way above and way below and etc NOT!... false fractals - a result of culturally accepted, but inadequate representations. I love Mandelbrot, etc.! I use fractal dimensions in some systems. But that said - I’ve concluded the only thing fractal across tf’s is up is up, and down is down. DBP has written so much better than I could about the pitfalls in the representations of the auctions – especially in bars. The map is not the thing mapped etc. If a three tick bar is already a rapidly degrading misrepresentation, then a weekly is not going to be an equivalent representation - it's just a worse representation, not a fractal in scale or behaviour. Bottom line for me – the real auction has NO fractals above or below it…ie the actual auction is not a ‘fractal’ of a larger or smaller ‘economy’ - so I can’t figure why to be looking for fractals in the representations of the auction – especially since what I found when looking for them (for freakin years) didn’t hold up in practical trading and systems development…

Tams, .. but I wanted to see them - still do! How come I can't ? :rofl:

With that definition "By fractal I mean the patterns and behaviors of the market are equally relevant, and traded the same, regardless of the time frame...more or less." My short answer would have to be NO! Long ago I bought into fractals, but my own direct experiences lead me to this --- They lied to us! As above, so below - NOT!

john w, Generally speaking, with mini's go with stop market... dynamically locating your stops is SO much more important than (any virtually inconsequential) occasional slippage . In normal auctions, slippage is negligible with at market stops. In a fast market, you have the options to 1 continue to apply your normal rules, 2 slide the stop order(s) out to disaster land, get up on the stick, and click in and out manually, or 3 practice never letting a stop get hit by going to market (and cancelling the live stop before it's hit)... with practice, one can actually do a lot of clicking in 1 sec ... Remember though that the use of stops, location of stops, type of stops, etc is ultimately always individual system dependent. If you don't qualify every answer you get to these types of questions with this dependency, it can end up sorta like asking a wheat farmer how to grow ginseng and getting a wheat growing answer to a ginseng growing question... hth

flyingdutchmen, re: “… and the line can be any value-line from price data to some kind of indicator line ? “ Yes, any ‘chartable’ line. A SimpleMovingAvg is the simplest example. Example attached. re: “i surpose you are refering to straight as in not "choppy" “ For this question, “choppy” is not quite the ‘other’ of straight. For this, it is straight (within tolerance) as in not curving. See attached – the grey rectangles show (very roughly) the curving areas and the none marked areas are (roughly) within the tolerance of straight. I use the word ‘roughly’ mainly because the eyes are easily deceived - especially to see straightness when it’s really curving…(maybe it's just my eyes, btw. but in any event I need and appreciate help with this) Many thanks.

flyingdutchmen, Hi. What is the most efficient (and ubiquitous across scales) way in EL to measure when a line (any line) has stopped curving and has straightened out for n bars? For purposes of example, let's look for 3 bars with the line ‘straight’ Note it’s not required that it be perfectly straight, just within tolerance. Many thanks. zdo

Free To Move or ZHealth RPhase...

OK guys. Here it CST – distilled. “Distilled my ass! It's a thousand links!” you say… hey I tried … blame it on the adhd This CST stuff is not pretty or conventional, but for me doing it has resulted in releases and recovery from long standing painful limitations, much improvement in adaptive ways of creating and responding in daily life, downright scary acceleration and speed, increased strength and endurance, and a progressive improvement in overall health. The joint mobility work gives me an unconventional avenue for lifting much heavier – as I still lift plate weights +- twice a week. The hard yoga has catalyzed an exploration of true spinal alignment techniques , etc. – not to mention a tension free neck and back. I’m sure the same can be said for a lot of programs (self or other designed), but none that I’ve ever tried even comes close to CST… INTRO Circular Strength Training Circular Strength Training FOR PURCHASE > The IntuFlow ‘ring’ https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/Free-To-Move-Book-Intu-Flow-2-DVD-_p_194.html'>https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/Free-To-Move-Book-Intu-Flow-2-DVD-_p_194.html or separately https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/Intu-Flow-2-DVD-Set_p_171.html https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/Free-To-Move-Book_p_192.html >The Workout ‘ring’ ClubBells https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/Clubbellreg-Training-for-Circular-Strength--DVD_p_14.html https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/The-Big-Book-of-Clubbell-Training_p_154.html Body Weight Bodyweight Exercise Revolution Complete Program: Bodyweight Workouts That Deliver >The Prasara ‘ring’ https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/Prasara-Yoga-Book-Prasara-Instructional-DVD_p_112.html Misc. for sale https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/Be-Breathed--DVD_p_22.html Note: I elected to filter the QuickStart Packages from this ‘distillation’ but they may be for you… if so… https://rmaxinternational.3dcartstores.com/ Hard core TACFIT. These are endurance drills… some of them make advanced P90X, etc workouts look like wet biscuits TACFIT Site Zhealth is a 3 phase central nervous system oriented ‘version’ of IntuFlow (which is biotensegrity focused). It might be a better fit for some. I benefit a lot from it... basically same ‘ends’ as IntuFlow but with a different progression What is Z-Health? | Z-Health Performance FREE SAMPLES (usually missing the content and ‘scientific’ depth , btw) >IntuFlow ring Free To Move (or start at for same videos [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1aLdYgfr3M&feature=related]YouTube - Scott Sonnon Intuflow Joint Mobility Beginner Part 1[/ame] and progress to other links listed there… “prehab”… ) >The workouts ring Bodyweight stuff. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0CAPIl-Hd8&feature=related]YouTube - Bodyweight Exercises Your Trainer's Never Heard Of - CST Quad Hop to Box[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-TRaG_A19c&feature=related]YouTube - Scott Sonnon Leg Killer Workout TACFIT Tactical Fitness[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZJwMpvJiYM&feature=related]YouTube - Scott Sonnon Threading Scorpion Bridge Progression[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mJNJKwcgbI&feature=related]YouTube - Top 5 Animal Bodyweight Exercises: #4 Ape Step[/ame] 4X7 series [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be6vO01rgx8&feature=fvw]YouTube - 4x7 Sonnon Day Part 1[/ame] Mostly the middle / workout ring, with a small sample of the Prasara yoga in the bridges and at the end [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t776I1J6Y1E&feature=related]YouTube - Be The Flow - Scott Sonnon[/ame] > Prasara ring [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duMScxR7LJ8&feature=related]YouTube - Scott Sonnon Prasara Parkour[/ame] all the best. zdo

fx houses do not “control price swings b/c they make the quotes”. Yes they do all the things reported in the article above plus a few other deviant little tricks the articles didn’t cover but --- If they widen or slip the spread outside the ‘tolerance’, they lose transactions immediately and the accts may punish them for months and months or even never come back. Same for overall transaction costs. If they deviate from other quotes (especially from ECN’s), there are algo’s just waiting to tear them a big new one… Stops that are ‘close by’ get run on all the exchanges – as much (and even more sometimes) in futures than in fx. Basically, all trading profits are made in spite of the house. It is the individual trader’s responsibility to optimize trxs costs period. Yes, ‘they’ do increment millions and millions in teenytiny amounts at a time off retail accounts. However, operating with far less revenue than fx, another ‘they’ probably makes close to the same "near certain" absolute millions and millions in ‘dealing’ listed stocks by ‘taking’ larger (but still tiny) amounts from their 'clients'... I just can’t support the notion that fx is significantly ‘crookeder’ than banks or exchange traded instruments. They are ALL crooked as hell… For example, currently Comex makes fx houses look like angels … they do not actually have in the warehouse the metals they are reporting they have… fishy serial numbers on bars… huge delays on delivery… exorbitant fees for delivery… The same kinds of sullied conditions can easily develop ‘overnight’ in energy, agriculturals, softs, etc. Not saying trust fx houses at all! Am saying they are no less trustworthy than any of the other types of houses in the current system. Not saying you’re overreacting to fx. Am saying you are probably under reacting to your other trading ‘exchanges’. In truly turbulent times, you would have just as much luck closing your positions at reasonable prices and ordering a check in the amount of your balance from an fx house as you would any of the other “more carefully regulated” houses…

Thanks Tiki. I understand what you’re getting at… but both of us may now be confusing everybody. I skimmed Myer’s work. It’s good stuff. Found nothing wrong or disagreeable there, but elected an experiential, ongoing exploration of my own “trains” rather than learn from static pictures and descriptions, etc. re: “conventional weight training can only be moved in two planes. This limited range of motion attempts to isolate particular muscles.”… To clarify further - that quote was about moving weights and it was working with fixed planes, which are inflexibly pegged to the orientation of the earth, and weights can only be moved in two dimensions (vertically and or horizontally)… (hang on, I’m going somewhere with this… ) and re: “We move in 3 planes all day long. When exercising we move in 3 planes easily. The body moves in the Saggital, Frontal and Horizontal planes” Good spot for differentiation from the conventional here. In this model these 3 conventional earth planes orientations are replaced with body – centric orientation of 6 ‘movements’ – heave, pitch, roll, sway, yawl, roll. This body relative orientation facilitates self (or coach) assessing and balancing training much more effectively. For example, conventional orientation has a squat as a vertical movement. In a body centric orientation, it is a heave. From a conventional sense this may seem to be a picayune distinction, but learning to experience this orientation while working or playing is incredibly freeing – much more than sessions with a Physical therapist, Chriopractor, or decent Physical Trainer have ever been – at least for me btw, folks, If you’re going to expect ME to be scientifically immaculate about this then I suggest you find the IGNORE button now! I am ultimately “just doing it” and thankfully move pain free now and will not do much more jabbering/selling about it... All the best.

Meanwhile... Here's a little more of the simple truisms of the mobility approach and then the depths and quality on which they are founded. The simple truism: "Train to the pain, not through the pain" Scott Sonnon Some real time quality and depth behind that truism ( this is from the ZHealth spin off orientation btw. Sonnon may have even better depth published re this truism ! ) : begin to dig: Why Not "Train Through Pain"?

Kiwi, Will give some thought to your “resulting ideas”. Thanks. re: Thanks again. Prompts me to add the following: My answer to the question was an answer – not the answer. Our ‘ways of peeking in’ 1 the general projective 2 the particular projective 3 the general objective 4 the particular objective are all valid. Most of us are blind to (even defended against) 1, 2, or 3 of them. Also, as one’s awareness of them increases, the test about which ones take precedence often leads us to some downright goofy conclusions re cause and effect, etc

bf, The CST 'library' is stuffed with free and for sale variations. Distillation of anything is slow... give me a little time to distill the essence for you. Thanks. zdo

From a reasoning point of view, this is so correct. From a real people point of view, it is pure BS. Take a sample of a hundred traders, give them a verified edge. 2-3 will shine. Another 20 will turn reasonable profits. And the other 77 will blow up, wilt, rot, start and stop, etc. - i.e. fail. Heck, test it with your own edge db and you'll see.. I’ve experienced this first hand when working to recruit and build a cadre of money managers. These stats also hold up pretty well with what ultimately happened with the Turtles – and they even had great, accessible models and adequate coaching. (and fwiw, Dennis’ ‘edge’ still tested out well during their run) Anyways, the ‘reasons’ this statistic bears out are ultimately the stuff of the ‘emotional side’ – whether it “ought to be” or not db, Your personal experience may not bear this out, but imo in this specific area you sell false expectations. You been getting away with polling and reporting about jesus’s world like that’s typical (instead of what his disciples were left with) way too long… Whether you are aware of it or not, every time you post a version of the above herein you are basically promulgating grail seeking – and that’s ok as long as we all acknowledge it. In the archetype and in trading’s play with it, the ‘grail seeking’ story line is varied, expanded, amplified, drawn out, very detailed. Finding the edge is 'where it’s at'. Everything after is basically 'happily ever after'. But that’s not really so in the archetype (and also in trading’s play with it) and in the not so published or detailed or sufficiently varied stories of what happens after the grail is located. Yet, (the vast benefits of finding the ‘grail’ / edge notwithstanding) the after is every bit as important as the seeking part – again, even if it does not carry all the various volumes of content across time of the excitatory drythic mamas that the seeking parts do… ie Even if finding the edge / grail does heal / release one, and allow the death/end of much and bring new beginnings - it does not remove all the reaction patterns established by previous traumas and inner ‘decisions’ about them… 2-3 will gain from what I’m saying…

bf, Yes, Scott Sonnon is the man behind Circular Strength Training. He has met his own challenges with explorations to the training methods of east, west, south, and north. See Scott Sonnon, The Flow Coach Blog Archive Breaking the Code on your Physical Mastery The three wings of CST are 1. IntuFlow, 2 the conditioning workout (Clubbells, body weight, or one’s sport or specialty) and 3 Prasara/Yang yoga These three combined are labeled Circular Strength Training. >The IntuFlow wing starts at full body JOINT mobility and sophisticates from range to circles to infinities to clovers to waves. Joint mobility trumps flexibility any day period! See examples from zHeath (a more central nervous system oriented spinoff of IntuFlow – good stuff but is ‘one winged’ imo) Pre and Post Z-Health Shoulder Range of Motion Testimonial and begin to dig: Mobility vs Flexibility - is there a difference? >The middle wing: (by the book is) clubbell (and bodyweight) training >The third wing is Presara Yoga Prasara Yoga. It is a hard yang body weight 'yoga' that functions to compensate for temporary and chronic imbalances like the pitcher or tennis player’s ‘big’ arm, etc. etc. Summary: All the truisms of the ‘system’ go way beyond the obvious - like "More is not better, better is better" turns out to have practical applicable theoretically sound DEPTH. Several themes run through all three wings of CST. 1)One is (again) the importance of myofacsial tensegrity. Specific to myofascial work, my understanding (to date) is that the Dynamic Joint work (Intu-Flow, etc) is inner bag focused, the ‘hard’ Yoga (Prasara, FlowFit, etc) is outer bag focused, and the Clubbell athletics integrates both inner and outer bags. These three combined are labeled Circular Strength Training. 2 Another of them is sophisticated breath... Here is some text about one of the issues CST breathing addresses - performance / fear issues (hello many traders!) Other themes are 3) moving in 6 degrees of freedom 4) how ‘jammed’ joints create weakness and the severe limits of ‘regular’ stretching for recovery or injury prevention. 5) dynamic postural alignment 6) Cycling properly "Cycle or circuit but don't cocktail", etc etc. This does not begin to encapsulate the whole of CST and it is redundant from being hastily compiled but... Enough theory – basically it’s a progressive way to “DO IT!” beyond what you thought you could 'do it'. (and a way by and for adhd geniuses? Maybe! There is way too much information and too many topics and sub methods on the RMax site! ) hth

januson ;) I can already venture how these comments will be dismissed as unnecessary to application – but they do have some bearing on the original question so… here goes. Price moves to stay as closely aligned to the underlying valuation of an instrument as is possible. The underlying valuation ‘moves’ much more than price. This valuation is the collective’s valuation and can only be guessed at by individuals. This underlying / accompanying is the ‘general projective’ of valuation. Price is ‘objective particular’ of valuation. It attempts to stay not too far behind the underlying valuation – and the attempts sometimes overshoot… This underlying / accompanying ‘general projective’ of valuation is ignored or neglected by most, attacked by a few, sidestepped by some as being only ‘demand’, etc, etc. The ‘general projective’ is one of the unspeakable, irrational numbers in markets… but If that accompanying valuation didn’t exist then MP’s would have no reason to approximate value areas, etc.. Wave traders would have no underlying basis from which to build counts, etc. SR ‘participants’ (a la Wycoff and progeny,etc.) would have not the slightest motivation to attempt to step in and participate in or ‘protect’ support (or resistance). More manipulative SR participants would have no motivation to look for the heavier participants’ attempts at exploitation via pricing campaigns. People would never bother writing trading books, etc. Soros, Buffet, etc would have washed up... Without the underlying, valuation, 3+ sigma events would be ignored by all… Black swans would all stay beyond the horizon… The conscious or unconscious assumptions about this underlying collective valuation of traded instruments can be explored and partially uncovered about every single method of trading (including random entry) Generally speaking, the ‘heavier’ in size a trader gets, the more conscious s/he becomes of his own valuation projections. (and not necessarily via fundamentals btw). Small, ‘technical’ trading is in some ways an easy luxury…and how