zdo

It was not personal. and unfortunately, my friend, it was not baggage. It was central to preserving inquiry. As Firewalker alluded to in his first post, the whole thread is marginally related to Wycoff anyway...

This is thread is intended to be a place for questions and theories closely related to http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f131/cracks-in-the-law-of-supply-4025.html Firewalker, thanks for starting that thread and thanks all for the replies. I posted a reply there but db deleted it – stated reason “inaccuracies”. I’m still trying to figure out how questions can be inaccurate – but that doesn’t really matter. Here are some questions I recreated from the destroyed post that may have value to some. They would fit in with the posts leading up to and about Veblen and Geffen goods and this post from Soultrader so re "one chain"? Is the concept of “dual auction” is a viable topic to explore? The ‘dealership auction (/ market)' has different ‘memories’ of Supply and Demand than does the ‘retail (/consumer ) auction (/market)’. Is that accurate? Size also plays with different Supply and Demand information than does the retail side. Is that accurate? Size plays by different Supply and Demand rules than does retail. Is that accurate? The ‘dealership auction' necessarily has different methods for managing and moving inventory than does the ‘retail’ trade. Is that accurate? The ‘dealership auction' literally acts differently on Supply and Demand info than do ‘retail’ participants. Is that accurate? There are actually multiple Supply and Demand chains. Is that accurate? (and, btw, don’t let appearances fool you – these (points and, more importantly, these) questions are NOT intended to be building a case for NEY or VSA, etc – that would be far too KISS for this inquiry )

If nothing else, this thread is a perfect example of a very common and unfortunate tendency on boards. LATC = let’s acknowledge the complexity KISS = kiss it simple stupid Two types of threads. Two trajectories too… The KISS adherents will let you know if you’re complicating their thread and will unceremoniously escort you ‘off the premises’ if you say anything that threatens their homeostasis. 'Complicaters' are not welcome. Yet the KISS adherents readily intrude into complex topics and impose their agenda. And generally, rather than assert their rights to exploration and complexity, LATC adherents politely and quite meekly accept the degradation in thought and inquisitiveness. Just because KISS adherents help keep it real and practical doesn't mean they should be given license to subvert complex inquiry. Now that I’ve pissed everyone off… :missy: re this topic - Uncertainty is the rub for both the KISS and then LATC crowds. “higher prices will attract more buying” should read “higher prices can attract more buying”. Actual ‘money flow’ does not follow KISS Supply and Demand laws. Yet I have never seen an adequate (simple or complex) explanation of what conditions can and do attract more buying and what conditions (could but) do not. Not from Wycoff and Co., not from VSA and Co, not from behavioural finance and Co, not from MP and Co., not from practical floor traders and Co, not from … Have you? KISSer's would accept 'random' or 'random-like'. Do you??? re "one chain"? The dual auction is a viable topic to explore. The ‘dealership’ market has different ‘memories’ of Supply and Demand than does the ‘retail market’. Is that accurate? Size also plays with different information than does the retail. Is that accurate? Size plays by different Supply and Demand rules than does retail. Is that accurate? The ‘dealership market’ necessarily has different methods for managing and moving inventory than does the ‘retail’ trade. Is that accurate? The ‘dealership’ market literally acts differently on Supply and Demand info than do ‘retail’ participants. Is that accurate? (and, btw, don’t let appearances fool you – these points and questions are NOT intended to be building a case for vsa - that would be far too KISS for this thread)

re "what should trigger divergence detection in my strategy and already arrived at 4 contradicting conditions" Indicators work! Both ways! ... "use that time to read the bars, learn to read a chart"

“Frustrating” = hooking up with a programmer who has not traded and does not understand trading. “More Frustrating” = hooking up with a programmer who has traded and does not understand trading. “Even More Frustrating” = hooking up with a programmer who has traded and does share nor understand your trading style. ie will try to translate / transfer your method into / onto his or her trading constructs. This one is subtle at first… but grows increasingly blatant and ‘frustrating’ “Very Frustrating” = hooking up with a programmer who has no passion for the vision and task at hand... "Possibly just as 'frustrating'" realizing you paid beaucoup dollars to have something unproven coded that you now no longer really care about... grail seeking with an entourage “Most Frustrating” = ... you fill in the blanks You should be able to write the context and the COMPLETE trading logic in pseudo code. You should leave zero areas even remotely open to ‘assumptions’. You should be able to thoroughly clarify any areas the programmer asks about - first verbally then by intricate amplification of the pseudo code for any and all sections in question – and, btw, it’s a huge sign of impending trouble if the programmer programs instead of asking many many clarifying questions… Just saw your posts on kreslik There are several rarely discussed but absolutely crucial points made about programming / automation in this link http://kreslik.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1086 … ignore any of them at your own peril…

bump #34... Did Wyckoff talk any about the 'auction' dynamics inside chop? ie Did he discussed what's going on inside your 'zones', db. Thanks.

Thanks MRW. I tried to say as much in the related thread where several traders were trying to garner Fisher videos. Basically, in the 'real' ACD, the entry techniques are pretty much as advertised / published (with some undisclosed exceptions for certain conditions). But how the trades are managed once triggered is when the 'real' tricks begin - and that info is generally undisclosed. Adjusting sizing to runs (+ and -) is also another important area where real time particulars are not disclosed. Fisher is no dummy. He knows published authors can raise money easier than can unknowns. Learning to copy his attitudes is of probably of far greater benefit than learning to copy his methods ... hth all

Did Wyckoff talk any about the 'auction' dynamics inside chop?

The Demand side... Where are the trucks? Seen any articles about the decrease of 18 wheelers on the Interstates?

I am now hesitant to post in either place... After thinking about this and the PM's I got, I’ll just speak publicly and do my part to keep things open. It seems to me this did not go past the level of a disagreement among allies – and certainly not to the level where any member needed to be protected from another member. I suspect some shadow projections and I also suspect all the parties involved with this are ‘big’ enough to deal with their own projections and be tolerant of other perspectives Although I too have reactions to his posts sometimes, the quality and intention of db’s posts far far outweigh that. Eiger rightly intervened in db and W dabbling over in VSA – but he needs to stand up and make sure he is not cast in the role of db’s current arch rival globally and in other threads. Anyways… The reply db posted was germane to the thread – it was immensely practical psychology. My earlier post about the efficacy, in general, of reviewing, journaling, repenting, whatever, mistakes and shoulda’s was not ‘practical’ nor was it ‘cultural’. In a poll I’d bet that high 90’s % of traders would believe that ‘reviewing and correcting’ mistakes is important. The leanings of the thread so far are ‘supportive’ of that belief. Real world examples are rampant. Here’s one I saw just this morning in a journal on another forum. It pretty much says it all about logging mistakes and focusing on weaknesses and what’s wrong. :crap: “Here is today's somewhat helpless attempt to discipline myself.” http://www.cyrox.com/forum/index.php?topic=209.75 Bluntly - That whole set of common beliefs may be a trap! Combining this challenge with concepts of ‘state dependent’ learning brings into question the effectiveness of the ‘practical’ journaling and concomitant ‘work’ discussed herein …whoops not practical! If I started an Impractical Trading Psychology thread, would anyone come? Probably not… :\

This thread seems to have dropped some posts. Did I miss a firefight?

db Thanks for keeping us all inside the normal box

re Journaling ETP Steenbarger Zen and Art of PokerIpersonally am starting to question even this neutral level of 'learning from mistakes'... ETP Steenbarger "... poker players [traders] sometimes ask, “What do you do in this particular situation?” There is really no correct answer to that question because it is the wrong question… The right question is: “What do you consider in this particular situation before determining what to do?” – David Sklansky, ‘The Theory of Poker’ So good before the fact journaling is 'what is being considered in this particular situation before determining what to do?" and good after the fact journaling is 'what else could have been considered to improve that trade and its management?' etc (PS Thanks to idax and dbP for the digests of these books)

"This mental-physical phenomenon is like a coin with two sides. On one side are the thoughts and emotions arising in the mind, on the other side are the respiration and sensations in the body. Any thoughts or emotions, any mental impurities that arise manifest themselves in the breath and the sensations of that moment. Thus, by observing the respiration or the sensations, we are in fact observing mental impurities. Instead of running away from the problem, we are facing reality as it is. As a result, we discover that these impurities lose their strength; they no longer overpower us as they did in the past. If we persist, they eventually disappear altogether and we begin to live a peaceful and happy life, a life increasingly free of negativities. In this way the technique of self-observation shows us reality in its two aspects, inner and outer. Previously we only looked outward, missing the inner truth. We always looked outside for the cause of our unhappiness; we always blamed and tried to change the reality outside. Being ignorant of the inner reality, we never understood that the cause of suffering lies within, in our own blind reactions toward pleasant and unpleasant sensations." Goenka :missy:

db, Do you have a minimum number of bars in a ‘box’ (/ zone) and if so, how many? Many thanks. zdo

Oh No - here they come :o Are they bringing socrates? :helloooo:

"They" can do it. See attached one tick chart. Thousands of contracts in about a minute (on what is clearly an upbar on a longer time frame chart such as an hourly). Note: this is not necessarily an illustration of the VSA setup you described above. It is only meant to show how size can sell into an up move... hth

If you are getting a laptop then just purchase 'off the shelf', include max ram, and confirm that the laptop video won't bottleneck processes. If you are getting a desktop then build from scratch... You don't really need to use a 'trading computer' specialist - machines tuned for 'gaming' do the trick for a whole lot less money... hth

swisstrader, Are you charging for it? Does it use Elc or Ade? Thx, zdo

An excellent ‘rationale’ for practicing real time vipassana

The Seven Signs of the Singularity: 1. You refinance your house and it's a thirty-second mortgage. 2. GM turnips form a biotech company and sequence their own genome. 3. The Nasdaq moves to scientific notation. 4. Your toaster has its own webcam site. 5. "Femtotrading" is frowned upon by day traders. :doh: 6. The Luddites are building a reclusive, slower-paced Dyson Sphere. 7. People are debating whether the Singularity will arrive in 2015 or 2030 nanoseconds. http://yudkowsky.net/humor/signs-singularity.txt

It may just be a cost(/benefit- ultimately?) of watching many time frames for too many hours but I'm suspicious that even price action cannot embed price action. :pc guru: Yes! Sorta like VisualTapeReading illustrated below. First attachment is about 20 minutes of 3 tick YM (TS doesn’t have subminute charts) Second attachment is 102 tick YM and I actually use it via Drop down to that for pinpointing entries after getting trend setup via other technqs. and timeframes. btw, much cleaner patterns show up in currencies than in ndx's, etc... I think the genealogy is GuppyMMA to CyroxRainbow with a few other adherents and contributors thrown in along the way.

Eiger, re Point taken... ok - almost everyone :shocked: Actually even that 'client' may be processing the material in the closet Anyways "A variant popular in the time of Samuel Pepys was 'auction by candle' in which the winning (highest) bid was the last one to be made before a small piece of lit candle died out.[2]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auction Speaking for myself only - I really do appreciate your posts. zdo

db, Thanks for your reply – so elegant so arrogant :o I was not questioning your paradigm at all. But, despite your excellent observations about “difference(s) in perceptual and conceptual constructs”, etc, I continue to question how clearly you actually communicate it to others vs how clearly you think and feel you communicate it to others. And your points about screen-time and study are not lost here. I have no doubt you see something and that you see that others are missing seeing it – but I can guarenfreakintee you it isn’t only and broadly ‘price action and volume’ or SR lines on a short time frame. For example: The “stretching” itself in any given WRB, wide spread bar, high range bar, etc, may generate just as much ‘resistance’ as does some horizontal zone or line indicating some quality and quantity of ‘memories’. In real time, this same “stretching” may also not happen to generate any resistance at all, just as any given horizontal R line may perhaps provide no more resistance than a jet vapor trail would to an ascending space shuttle. And either case can occur regardless of volume / activity patterns! Happens all the time. You’re scaring me db. I’m starting to suspect you are seeing things you aren’t conscious you are seeing. I’m wary that you may start manifesting things you are not conscious you are manifesting. Have a good one.

re: "…The "WRB", in other words, disappears when the price action is displayed in another interval. The price action is the same; the only thing that's changed is the means by which it is displayed." Yes that is true. But, in other intervals, a run up into resistance (etc) does not disappear. Please be careful here - and I know we've had to deal with this issue before on T2W. You are again questioning the other's representation system without really fully explaining how yours is different / better. Even though I could see how you might feel you have explained it ad infinitum elsewhere, there are aspects to it that you are possibly so 'unconsciously competent' at seeing that you don't even realize they are a part of but not explicit your processing of price action. I'm not making you wrong. And please don’t let anyone run you off. I’m asking you to explain the difference – besides the obvious fact of different representations of the same market action. Everything we see on our screens is a representation of the market – not the market itself. It is all at least a once removed map of the auction – whether one is looking at T&S, MP, Ohlc, Candle, Tic, CRB, P&F, MarketDelta, or lord knows what else. And Eiger - I can say with certainty that all these posters you are chiding for going off topic are actually here in this thread to learn VSA and also that there is no way on earth they can suddenly divorce their old representation systems and ‘think’ pure VSA just like you or Tom or… Taking those same time periods and showing the VSA interpretation of the same market activity, rather than make others wrong for the way they represent the action to themselves is the best way to keep them on track.