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.
SK0
-
Content Count
54 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Thanks for the reply. "Ten cases" were invented after the flaws. It is popular. I respect the choice.
-
Do I have to respond, sigh? That 2006 post you pointed to was telling us to ignore flaws. I disagree. No? Flaws are not merely hitch, dip or stall. FTT is a flaw too according to Jack Hershey. (Don't ask me to dig out the proof.) So, should one hold for any kind of flaw? The P V relationship says if volume bar shows decline (exclude inside bar case), price trend will change soon (with FTT). In reality, price sometimes continues to advance. Maybe, understanding flaws will help. I know the concept of flaws is suck to many people and I used to think that way too. Jack Hershey did not explain clearly to our satisfaction. I don't think that Jack Hershey ever mentioned hitch, dip or stall flaws as non-dominant. He said they are different kinds of pauses or taking a breath INSIDE a dominant traverse (in his terminology interchangeable with tape or tape-like traverse) when price advances. In other words, fan the traverse container. I also noted that he did not mention they must be in pennant or inside bar pattern. Come on, you know very well that Jack Hershey's method(s) and Spydertrader's method(s) are totally different except they are based on the same basic principles. Even their methods changed drastically over time again and again. I lean on some concepts from Jack Hershey that I find useful though they may appear outdated to others. I respect their choice.
-
I disagree. It is either we don't understand fully or Mr Jack Hershey was spitting nonsense. I can't follow Spydertrader's method.
-
Thanks 203NG, river, cnms2. I have over the years reviewed how Jack described these internal trend formations (hitch, dip, stall) occurring in dominant tape-like price movement in his Channels for Building Wealth document and a few very old posts. Do you consider they might occur other than in pennant patterns or lateral formations in a price movement? I mean in translation case.
-
Could you post a snippet of Jack's blackboard sketches of Hitch, Stall and Dip that somebody uploaded on ET many years ago? Thanks.
-
Bad news.
-
Hi Heisenberg. FYI Mr Black was an excellent JHM trader. He sure knows the simple fundamentals of JHM profoundly and that are all he care. Look at some of his old charts in ET and TL. He was already trading at the tape level, more like a scalper. A scalper usually stays in the market for a few minutes. An excellent scalper reads DOM and T&S. From his opinion about TA, I believe that Mr Black does not need to look at a chart to trade. He was indirectly telling you that minority rules and this is one of the core insights in DOM. May be I can help you to answer the question. No, the signals are inside DOM and T&S.
-
We know R2R is a component of volume sequences that we don't think too much CONSCIOUSLY about what corresponds on the Traverse channel at the price pane. R2R is not an event on the Traverse channel. (Hint: Read my replies again. What event do you see concurrently on Traverse channel when you see Increasing Red? Pt 1, BO, Pt 2, Pt 3, VE, New Pt 2, New Pt 3, FTT, new FTT. Which one?) I assume that you know the answer by now. Now, what else do you need to see on the price pane to know that you have the event? (Hint: See what I added on the amended chart.) See what I mean something is missing on the chart?
-
Your answer to second "riddle" is correct. Good. Use this answer to solve first "riddle" accurately. What EVENT, specifically, do you have when this occurs on first "riddle"?
-
I want to throw out some "riddles" for Heisenberg based on the posted chart. 1. There is something critically important missing, without which one is more or less guessing the price move from Pt 1 to Pt 2 of a forming Red Traverse container. 2. Pt 3 of the Red Traverse container can not be known that we know until several bars later.
-
Sorry that I have annoyed you with my replies to NYCMB. I am not an expert in annotation nor do I care too much. I merely want to live (= trade and learn and horn more advanced skills) with what is given in limited context instead of chasing dream and solving puzzles. I hope that she will figure out she can still live with limited context. Sorry if I annoy you again. I hereby bow out.
-
Look at the scalloped-shaped volume bars of THAT Down Traverse starting at 13:00. It is non-dominant. What is before this non-dominant move? It must be a dominant move in opposite sentiment. We were given limited information set of context prior to THAT Down Traverse which was the main interest of the drill. So I assumed that some near ending bar of prior day as the start of Up Traverse. Pragmatically for the drill, we wanted to get the RTL of Up Traverse which could be flatten, accelerated or extended. Now, what you see in the declining volume prior to 13:00 is the end effect of one or more pairs of M1 and M2. The volume during this phase is usually much weaker than the initial FTT. Use the Peak at the initial FTT for comparison to see the volume dominance. To know with certainty of having correct annotation, you need to have full information set of context. That is, you must look back in days and aided with 15m, 30m or daily chart to get a swing point that is absolutely the beginning of a Channel or even Super-Channel. Then you build your Channel from there.
-
No problem. I do follow why 'it' would look like a Down Tape. I should check how the day before would be annotated. But I am lazy and am very strong minded about my inferences and logic. Also, I treat Traverses casually as contextual elements, good to be correct but not threatening my beliefs.
-
Don't be shy. Please put up your annotations so we can learn how 'it' was a non-dominant Down Tape. I don't follow ehorn's or anyone's annotations blindly. But as you can tell from his color scheme on the annotations on that day and the next day, 'it' was a non-dominant Down Traverse. FYI, I did not follow and learn from any discussion in this TL thread in the past. I dislike rhetorical exchanges.
-
What you see is what you get. Look at ehorn next-day's chart I posted too.