DynamicFx

I can only answer this via the question, 'when were you profitable'? And the unfortunate answer to that, was when I traded without a chart, and instead used macro-economic currency fundamentals to discern the trend bias, whilst trading without a stop. I say unfortunate, as it never really ever made any sense to me. I hated it, and wanted to find some visual logic behind what was happening. Hence the move to TA, which years later hasn't really helped in any tangible way. I often remind myself of those random number generated charts that appear at times, that show all the classical patterns and S/R, but ultimately are the result of randomness. I think it's doable, but I'm unfortunately coming to the conclusion, that it's the macro-economic approach and deep pockets, that ultimately are your best bets. I can at times see those certain patterns, yet I also see how the vendor behind the explanation, is working the explanation. My tuppence ha'penny.

I should have clarified in relation to currencies. It's just that I looked into the concept of HH/HL - LL/LH a few months ago, and I too found fifteen minutes to be more comfortable. Maybe I just couldn't identify the relevant swings on anything lower. On another note, I was looking at S/R in general, and was trying to figure out which trigger called to my attention the easiest. I'm still undecided, as I can see merit in the breakout, but I also see merit in the reversal bar that often comes before the breakout. The attached chart is an example. The grey lines are S/R from a slightly higher timeframe. What I dislike about the breakout, is the almost inevitable re-test of the break, whereas the reversal bar has a better chance of remaining untouched, at least in the short-term. What is the general consensus on reversal bars, from the breakout traders in this thread? Thanks.

Thalestrader, Could I just ask, why fifteen minutes for the timeframe? Have you looked at other periods and came to the conclusion that fifteen is more reliable? Thanks.

I was busy setting up my new account today, but took a demo trade anyway. In all honesty I wouldn't have took it live. If I had a larger account, and could tolerate a wider stop then I would. However, was the NFP move being setup in pre-market with the DB and then the DBPB, and even a MTFB. I also think my counting could be at fault, as especially with including forex charts, I seem to be seeing more H3's as being the setups that trigger a move. Granted, the H2 including pre-market data never triggered, but it was close.

I never knew that, so thanks. I was sure it said 2.60 roundturn before, but it's actually 2.70 (1.35 per contract). So 2.70 per contract would actually be a little more expensive than spot forex for 2.50 per tick, but I suppose you'd have the futures benefits. I'll perform some paper trades next week, and see how things work out.

Hello, I've got my new IB account set up. Could someone please confirm I have this correct, with regards to the new E-micro currency futures. The commission is $2.60 for M6E, with a tick value of $1.25. So two ticks will more or less cover the commission. As I'm new to futures, am I correct in thinking that if I trade 2 contracts, the commission is still $2.60. So if IdealPro has a commission of $2.50 plus the spread, lets say 1 pip, with a minimum 25,000 entry, then it's a minimum of $5.00 to trade $2.50 per pip. Therefore, am I correct in thinking that trading two M6E contracts ($2.50 per tick) is actually cheaper than trading spot forex, if I assume that M6E doesn't have a spread. Finally, is anyone using these new E-micros, have you had any problems or are they doing fine. Or have I got this wrong, and is spot forex the better option. Thanks.

I thought the first trade was going to be a strong down-up reversal, but in hindsight I can see it was probably a failed BO pullback. Second trade was an H2 by my counting (still unsure on the counting, but working on it) and second attempt to reverse yesterday's low. Last trade was a wedge and DT. I was not at the PC for the DBBF just above my text, but might have taken it.

EMA Gap Bar: In a flat or up market, it is a bar with a high below the EMA. On the attached chart, is my understanding of the EMA gap correct, in that every bar under the EMA is a signal bar, and once the signal bar triggers it becomes the entry bar. Therefore, would I be correct in thinking that a buy stop is to be placed above every bar under/over the EMA in a flat market, in the hope it triggers and becomes the gap bar. Or am I misinterpreting what he means by 'bar with a high below the EMA'. Thanks.

Could someone please offer some advice, or comment on the attached chart please. I'm on my second read through the book now, but today realised I still don't really have the faintest idea what I'm doing. I think I should just stick with one pattern that I can see easily, and that's the DB/DT, which I didn't take today as my mind was too messed up with regards to direction. Anyway, I can't clarify in my mind how to trade a trendline break. When the line breaks at (a), we then look for a continuation of the trend. I assume we're meant to go long on bar (b). It didn't trigger but bar © had a MTB which triggered and then stopped you out. That continuation broke on the next bar. Am I right in thinking that the bar after © is the bar we should short. The problem I'm having is, is that when a trendline breaks and you then go into drawing smaller degree trendlines, which you want to break to clarify a change in trend, the move often happens before any confirmation can happen. If I'm drawing too many trendlines after the break at (a), I don't understand at what point the continuation of the trend is indicated as having failed. It could even be argued that the pattern after the break at (a) forms a DB bull flag that fails. There's just too much information for me to process in real time, and by the time I had, the move was over. I was looking for a short, as the move up looked like a wedge, but it just kept on growing. Did anyone else find today difficult, or was it just me. Thanks.

I've been trying to figure out the ETF route for a few weeks now, and I've got nowhere really. I never thought I'd say this, but learning the price patterns is not the difficult part, it's the transition over from forex to these other instruments. Books and articles I've read suggest trading the SPY instead of the ES, if you're new to these instruments. However, it appears that you need a much larger account to trade the SPY, which seems to defeat the purpose of suggesting the SPY to new traders in the first place. So it seems I'll just have to continue trading forex until I get past $25,000, then I can consider these other instruments. Brooks says this on his site: If you are just starting out, you should consider day trading the SPY or some other ETF. The FAS and FAZ are very good choices (the 3x financial and 3x inverse financial ETFs). I've never heard of FAS or FAZ, but I assume they fall under the pattern day trader rule too. So it looks like I'm left with the ES or YM, and can forget higher timeframes unless I stay with forex.

Wedge and FFF. In and out within seconds, as even on demo the tick value is too much for me. Is there any oil instrument or derivative that can be traded with a smaller dollar value per tick, that moves similar to CL. Thanks.

Fair enough. I've attached another reasoning, which includes pre-market data. There's two trendline overshoots and a possible wedge. The bar that reversed the overshoots was also diverging. So you'd be expecting at least two waves up, and price to stall at the beginning of the wedge. I'm not too sure on these, but the pre-market data could also be showing a failed final flag, which also suggests a deeper correction.

I'm not sure I'm reading your chart correctly, but I'll comment anyway. If you shorted at the top of that bar with the arrow, then for me it was a strong bullish bar, that looked as though it was attempting to close the gap. He also mentions that you should only short bars that are with trend. If the reversal bar at the top had of been bearish, it would have been a better setup. I think the second L2 I've marked, after the trendline break and pullback, was a better short entry, as it was also a DT short. Having said that, I never took anything in the first two hours, as the bars were too wide and overlapping too much.

I saw the trendline break and was waiting for the pullback. As you can see I took the wrong entry bar. I sat and watched the bar marked 'A' and thought to myself, this is buying coming in, this is the entry bar. Even though it was only demo, I was quite frustrated in not taking it. When I checked my YM chart later in the day, this setup was much clearer. I also noticed the barbed wire pattern after that first move up. There are certain nuances to barbed wire that I need to work on, as at times it can just be a continuation pattern as seen a bar 'B'. I saw bar 'B' break below, and was expecting another leg up, but it closed just too much in the middle for my liking, so I passed on it. If I had of waited for the trendline break later in the day, I might have been successful with those final trades.

Had this closed out at 94.20 earlier this morning, which I set last night, for +43. What I'm finding from the book, is that I'm more comfortable with setups that I already could in part, see myself before reading the book. Brooks has just clarified the situation and gave me confidence to trade what I see. I'm still looking at his other observations, but for now I'm concentrating on these trendline breaks and pullbacks. The target was where I thought price might stall, at the beginning of the move down yesterday. It's actually gone higher now, but I'm still happy with the result. Other pairs had the same pattern, and I should have actually went with GBP/USD instead. It also highlights something he mentions in the book. The last push down appears to be a fake head and shoulders break. The line across the bottom is where I see the pattern (you can't see the left shoulder on the attached chart).