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.
cnms2
-
Content Count
341 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by cnms2
-
It seems that your thick red RTL points1 and 3 don't agree with your gaussians (?).
-
Support becomes Resistance becomes Support ...
-
Intraday,market internals dominate; daily and higher, externals do. See this link
-
A few notes .
-
I suggest you reformulate your question:- my trading fractal is ... - bar N: context is ..., signal of change is ... - bar M: ... Also, post a properly annotated chart.
-
That was extreme volume and "pace acceleration"; in other words volume was peaking but that was not "peak volume". Look at bar's volatility. Not sure I've seen this terminology used by Spydertrader in this thread (?). The JW ... I see increasing red volume on my chart, with a slight bar volatility decrease (so, on yours, decreasing volume and volatility), 50% overlap, close at the low of the bar ... Again, things not discussed in this thread, but even so, no signal of change on any viewable fractal for those two bars. Agreed?
-
What kind of question is that? Why would they be change?
-
As I wrote, my advice is to follow this method as described by Spydertrader in this thread, without adding or ignoring anything, iteratively refining your understanding.
-
12345678901234567890
-
12345678901234567890
-
It's understandable that you might have theoretical concerns and ideas how to solve them. It is also conceivable that this method can be improved further, even further than its expert level. My advice is to not waste your time with either of them. Study carefully all of Spydertrader's posts in this thread; start to apply what you understand; continue re-reading the same posts, open to learn more; correct your misunderstandings; practice; ... repeat this loop, gradually improving, until you get it. Ask pertinent questions in this thread, but take any advice with a grain of salt: you may not fully understand that advice, or it may come from a person who doesn't know that he's giving bad advice. Without any fixes or improvements, this method should allow you to become constantly profitable, and compounding will take care of making you wealthy. Good luck!
-
See Spydertrader's post:
-
Your chart with my "crayola" trades.
-
On my resolution, the day was a channel down having its first traverse (1-BO-2) made of the red-down (pink+blue) plus the pink-up gaussian through. Disclaimer
-
Pretty much, excepting that your traverse is my channel.
-
Looking only at the volume pane: trends and peaks. Disclaimer
-
Firstly: I believe that the only source to learn this stuff from is directly from Spydertrader's words (posted and spoken). Somebody else's interpretation may help, but it's more likely that it will introduce something inconsequential or even incorrect. Having said this, I also believe that sharing personal points of view, when taken at their face value can be useful. Occasionally people become defensive, sometimes delusional, but overall Spydertrader's forums proved to be of the highest quality. Secondly: it is again my opinion that although all the information posted by Spydertrader and by Jack is of the highest value, to benefit from it the student have to carefully look at it both in the historical context it was posted, as well as at his own level of understanding of the method. Not all the aha's we have are real aha's that will stand the test of time ... and market. There are some nuances, even differences, between how Jack and how Spydertrader seem to trade. There is also different emphasis on certain elements of the systems presented in this forum and elsewhere. I believe that almost exclusively relying on what Spydertrader posted in this forum is a complete and profitable system. Now, trying to quickly reply to your question: looking at ehorn's and rs5's charts from that day, I thought that both came to about the same conclusion on a fractal, but differed how they went to the next higher fractal. To me, it looked that ehorn's blue up goat wasn't probable because its pt2 and pt3 didn't fit the volume. I believe that faster fractals show as volume formations having smaller amplitude, absolute and / or relative to slower fractals. The actual volume we see results from the superposition of all existing fractals. In that particular case, it looked that we had a complete retrace down, and the resumption of the up dominant move at the end of the day (that itself is a retrace of the next higher fractal move). The blue up goat suggested, in my view, otherwise. If memory serves me well, that day was a down retrace, and the up move in the middle of the day was a retrace in that down retrace. When considering the relative volumes of the pt1, bo, 2, 3, ftt, we should keep in mind that on different fractals a through might correspond to a peak. Still, it seems that always the picture, when correctly analyzed, is correct for each fractal observable on every chart. Obviously the typical pace throughout the day has to be factored into our analysis.
-
Not sure what you're asking ... Volume bars, peaks, peaks of peaks, through their absolute and relative levels define moves on all fractals. They help you stay on your fractal of choice. Although a skilled trader can probably trade almost whatever observable fractal he wants on any chart, for any given chart resolution there's an optimum tradable fractal that I believe to be the traverse level, or L2.
-
Fractal? Context? ...
-
It's interesting to notice that your blue up channel's pt2 black volume is a little smaller than its pt3 red volume.
-
The price also climbed up to the RTL of the bull market with its pt3 in early 03 ...
-
It seems that your 1-BO-2-3s don't match x2X2y2X sequences on your second level of gaussians. Also, my data shows a lateral starting on the 9:05 bar.
-
On trending days, sometimes it's harder to see the three leg sequences on each of the three monitored fractals, but they're still there.
-
By this I understand that when trendlines and gaussians are correctly drawn they should make sense. This refers both to the volume bar trends and to their pace.
-
My interpretation is that a gaussian is a volume formation that has an increasing slope followed by a falling slope. We can see gausians formed of volume bars, of groups of bars, of groups of groups of bars, ... x2X2y2X is another type of volume formation. If x, y represent decreasing volume, and X, Y increasing volume, then the gaussian is X2y, or dominant followed by non-dominant. So we have two types of gaussians R2b in down trends and B2r in up trends.