Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.
romanus
-
Content Count
103 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by romanus
-
Tuesday, August 11, 2009.
-
Monday, August 10, 2009
-
I don't think annotating that way would be correct.
-
Friday, August 7, 2009.
-
Speaking for myself only: my original chart contained an error in gaussian annotations. Terminating medium B2B at 12:30 is not possible because the original tape (black dashed labeled (a) in the attached) that moves the price from Point 1 to Point 2 of 'something' is not broken and as such that whole up move lacks that which would make it a 5 min ES level traverse. The blue dotted tape (labeled (b) in the attached) IS broken, however, since is completly resides inside the original black dashed tape, I annotated it with skinny gaussian lines.
-
Thursday, August 6, 2009
-
Nice catch. I terminated my medium B2B at the wrong place and didn't become aware of annotation error until this morning when the up trend ended with the tape.:crap:
-
It appears to me that the market formed a 5 min ES level Traverse, based on gaussians.
-
The way I looked at it, which may not necessarily be correct, is that, if one begins the down tape with bar 4, one would effectively place p1 of that down tape at the high of bar 4 and p2 at the low of bar 5. Which results in a tape that doesn't have a p3. When bar 6 arrives with increasing volume we have a trend, and as such p3 must be placed somewhere. Bar 5 already has p2 at it's low and as such is eliminated from consideration. Accelerating the tape to bar 6 produces the tape which has p1 and p2 on bar 5 and p3 on bar 6, which may or may not be more accurate way of annotating a trend.
-
Adding a word 'dominant' or 'non-dominant' in front of the word 'lateral' doesn't change the nature of the lateral formation/movement. I believe it only serves as a way of differentiating various types of laterals. Sort of "vocabulary word" type of deal. However, don't qoute me on this, as there may be a hidden meaning there in the particular choice of words (dominant/non-dominant).
-
Examples of all three in the attached.
-
I note 3 types of laterals: (a) Point 2 to Point 3 movements, (b) post Point 3 movements into the trend, and © Point 1 to Point 2 movements [e.g. 15:15 on 7/23]. I suppose, both (b) and © can be classified as non-dominant. [As in one thing is dominant entering the lateral and then another thing is dominant exiting the lateral]. Other than their location in the gaussian sequence, I can't think of any other way of differentiating them.
-
Drawing a down tape from Bar # 6 TO the OB (Bar # 7) and fanning it (decellerating) to include increasing red volume Bar # 9 will produce an LTL which Bar # 9 failed to reach. For an FTT to exist there must be a valid LTL which that FTT failed to reach. The definition of the valid LTL is supplied by the market itself. It appears to me that the tape drawn to increasing volume bar meets that definition (perhaps because Points 1 and 3 reside on separate bars - and therefore one can consider it a trend, versus a tape drawn to decreasing volume bar, which has points 1 and 3 on the same first bar of the tape).
-
See attached. Also see Tiki's and dkm's charts I referenced in the original post.
-
IMO annotating the first two down tapes the way you did would result in a tape sequence (dom, non-dom and dom) creating a completed traverse sequence on tapes ( and consequently on medium thickness gaussians as well) at 10:05 OB. The first tape is drawn to decreasing volume bar. As such it has all three Points (1,2 & 3) on the same bar - Bar 1. Bar is an increasing volume bar which makes lower low. As such we must fan to accommodate it inside the original tape trendlines ( the way dkm did on his chart that he posted). The fanned out (decelerated tape - red on dkm's chart) has it's Point 3 on Bar 3. Drawing the tape from Bar 2 to Bar 3 the way you did would result in tape having it's Point 3 on Bar 3 and consequently two trends of different slope sharing the same Point 3. I don't believe this is a possibility.
-
The example shows point 2 of the tape on the VE of the tape. (Black trendlines do not represent a 5 min ES level traverse). Black trendlines do not represent a 5 min ES level traverse. They represent a tape. A tape which ends with an FTT at 13:30. Yes it does. Tapes, however, being the smallest unit in terms of fractals may represent a challenge as their point 2 must be an FTT of something finer than a tape, which is not always identifiable on a 5 min chart. Luckily, in our example, dashed teal trendlines exist. See attached.
-
Here's another one, in case you were ever wondering (like me ) what the hell was built that day.:doh:
-
The LTL is still where the price says it is, however the gaussians determine when all sequences reached their completion and where the current trend ends and new begins on the same fractal.
-
Blue trendlines represent a 5 min ES level Traverse with Point Three at 14:20. Olive and black trendlines represent tapes (which have tapes inside it). The blue Point Two at 10:45 is derived from looking at Price only. If 10:45 was also the end of medium level B2B, then the entire 10:45 to 13:25 lateral would have been \R of medium thickness which would cause 13:30 to be the completion and the end of the 5 min ES level sequence. That in turn would mean that a new sequence would begin from that point forward for a down 5 min ES level Traverse. As you can see it didn't happen. Which means something prevents 10:45 from being the end of medium level B2B. That something is the lack of FTT at that point. 10:45 is a VE of the olive tape and 13:30 is an FTT of the black tape, with black tape derived from olive by fanning. Again, the above is based on defining the 'TAPE' and 'TRAVERSE' on both trendlines and gaussians, and not just by looking at price alone. You are absolutely correct. P2 is where gaussians say it is.
-
1. All trends ( skinny, medium or thick lines in the picture) end with an FTT. 2. Where skinny trend ends the market arrives at a Point (1, 2 or 3) of a Traverse. 3. The skinny trend ends with FTT. 1 + 2 + 3 => A Point (1, 2 or 3) of a traverse ( medium thickness lines) represents an FTT of 'something' of the next smaller fractal (skinny lines). P.S. The thickness refers to both trendlines and gaussians. 'Something' may look like a traverse, however, if it is not (a traverse, based on gaussians), then it must follow that correct annotation of that 'something' must be done with skinny trendlines and gaussians.
-
It is right where the medium B2B gaussians end. Apologies for missing the black skinny trendlines.
-
Please note the skinny olive and teal trendlines in the attached.
-
One can go no further then post #4 of this thread : http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f34/price-volume-relationship-6320.html#post70030 and simply look at the picture attached there. For convinience I am posting the picture again.
-
Attached is yet another example of the same principles at work - placing the end of traverse level B2B gaussians (medium level thickness) at any point in time prior to 13:30 would not result in correct identification of the traverse.
-
It's not an implication, it's a reality - the basic market tenet.