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.
gucci
-
Content Count
211 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by gucci
-
You are on the right track. However, you have to be more precise when using the words "traverse" and "dominance". Are you sure that bar 1 represents a dominant bar of a TRAVERSE? It is a BO bar. What does any formation represent? Why is the thing annotated with dark green lines to the left of the area in question doesn't represent a traverse of the trading fractal? Look closely at bar 3. What do you see? A spike bar (even IBGS in this case) on increasing black. Now the increasing black stands for the "bullishness" (think for a moment: "bullishness" of what?) but the spike stands for the "bearishness"(think again: "bearishness" of what?). Rings a bell somewhere?
-
Of course you are doing it wrong. You missed a whole bunch of important annotations containing all the information needed. Where is CO? Where is the degapping? Where are three annotated fractals? Why did you mixed up AHT and RTH? How many time in ET did you have to read the instruction from Spydertrader to thor.... and cor.... ann.......the chart? Sorry for the terse voice of my response but it is you who should DO the work. I myself made such mistakes numerous times, believe me, you can search for my stupid posts in ET. The point is my responses will not put into your mind that what should be build there...
-
Your comments prove that you did not study the first chart. Look at the dashed traverse in the first chart you didn't even ask questions about.(starting at 16:10) anyway... It IS invalid if you ascribe both of the traverses in question to the SAME fractal, which they aren't. No, it is like the faster fractal starting before the slower fractal reaches completion. It is bottom - up, nothing new. Indeed it is and it is a beauty, isn't it? Note how the traverse, that gave you trouble, starts after the movement from point 1 to point 2 of a SLOWER fractal completes (creating the pink FASTER fractal traverse in the process). The green FASTER fractal traverse overlaps with the pink FF traverse at ftt of this pink FF traverse Likewise the SLOWER fractal UP traverse overlaps with the SLOWER fractal DOWN traverse at the FTT of this DOWN traverse. Note the loci of the corresponding points 2 in both pairs of traverses. So when staying on the same fractal there are no "inconsistencies" or "invalidities". Of course there is. You do not have to annotate it, but you DO have to pay CLOSE ATTENTION to the happennings inside each of traverses. Why do you think there is no noise nor anomalies in the market? Look at the FTT of the slower fractal down traverse. What you see here is a BO of a pennant. (note that price still stays outside the boundaries of the pennant) Usually such an event doesn't signify a return to dominance one needs to confirm the point 3 of a traverse, right? In this case however it is all the market has in the pipeline for the increasing red volume to confirm the point three. Why? The (dominant) movement from point 3 to FTT of the SLOWER fractal is accompanied by the concomitant movement from point 2 to point 3 (non dominant) of the FASTER fractal. So the dominant down movement is "carried " so to speak by the bullish sentiment of the FASTER fractal traverse. Likewise the (dominant) movement from point 1 to point 2 of the FASTER fractal traverse is "carried" by the bearish sentiment of the SLOWER fractal traverse moving non dominant from point 2 to point 3.NOTE how the FASTER fractal moves from point 1 to point 2. DO you see increasing volume there? Now try to study the chart I posted. Try to understand how one can SEE the dashed traverse. Another area worth studying resides between 9:45 and 10:05. Try to think in terms of dominance and non dominance while painstakingly taking into consideration all available information. DO NOT think UP any new rules, use the available ones and think in terms of fractals. If you do, you will find out that one can argue about the locus of gaussian trough in that area. AND you can ALSO find out why it is NOT of paramount importance in this specific example. (The same holds true for the B2B trough at 17:00) On a side note you have no business looking for FTTs at VE's . (read your comments again.) HTH.
-
Three levels refer to the three fractals.
-
This chart can also clear a lot of things up. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2133515
-
This is a VERY informative chart to study the interlocking of various fractals. Remember, noise does NOT exist. When studying the chart keep in mind: "The pattern has a defined ending after point 3 and the three iterative refinements are part of dealing with the end effects. Any trip across the parallelogram on dominant volume after point 3 prolongs the parallelogram if and only if the volume dominates and price responds to "traverse". A signal is generated when volume no longer "pushes" price to a better place in the traverse. This occurance is an ftt." (Quote from Jack)
-
Yes. YAW........................
-
I think I understand your way of thinking on the dominance of the first leg. Ezzy made a good point concerning turning a guidance into a set of hard rules. First of all, one should ASSUME non dominance until and when the market tells otherwise, right? It seems to me that you came to a CONCLUSION, that there is no dominance in the first leg based on the rules for BOs and FBOs instead of ASSUMING it and then waiting for the MARKET to tell you exactly what you have.. If you look at what the market does LATER, you can see that the dominance is there, but one couldn't see it because of the rules for BOs and FBOs. Look at the volume of the 2R tape. You see increasing red which drives the price in the non dom tape to the right till it breaks the RTL of the tape. Remember back then Spyder sometimes called faster fractal traverses” thick” tapes. He also gave a definition for it which not really everybody found usefull. It was (and I paraphrase) “anything less than that which defines a traverse”. Now I understand that this was actually the best definition that covered all cases. This is exactly what we’ve got here: something less than a traverse. But it is at the same time something that is larger than a simple tape. (Concerning the increasing red in the non dominant tape. (2R) Remember the three cases for an increasing volume in the non dominant direction?) Now look at it this way. Going to a point 2 the market couldn’t do it in one simple tape. There were obstacles (traders trying to go short in this case) which had to be overcome, hence pennants,laterals and BOs. But how was the market supposed to overcome it without dominance which eventually created this messy tape? Anyway, the moment you see the non dominant tape, you know where your B2R should be. See another example in the attachment. It is a bit different but still makes my point. (The last pink traverse) I hope I didn’t add to a confusion. HTH. Edit: by the way, such behaviour of the market and the overall decreasing black volume in the traverse gives a clue about dominance or the non dominance of the whole traverse.
-
......................................................
-
................................................................
-
I'm not an expert. So here are my . There is no way all of your Gaussians could be correct. Just like Ezzy said you have a tape (faster fractal traverse if you wish) here. The rtl had to be fanned all the way through, as Ezzy pointed out. So all you have in terms of the sequences (judging from the provided snippet) is B2B. Try to draw the non-dominant 2R tape there. HTH
-
Sorry for being tardy in response. Re.1. You are right. On the three bars in question we do not have a dominant tape. Look closely at those bars. Note the first encreasing vol results from the bo of a pennant. Right after this bar you get decreasing vol. The third bar shows you all of this volume resulted from traders who were on the wrong side of the market in this pennant. No comparison with any peaks. HINT!!! Look at the 12:30 bar and the lateral that it formed...(not properly annotated on my chart) Is this lateral over at the time in question? Do you understand now how important thorough annotations can be? Re.2. You can get a completion of the faster fractal along with the completion of the sequences on the slower fractal to witness such an occurance. Read the post from Jack that was linked here. Re.3 Well, you can assume anything you want, but I do not remember that there is any requirement for a point 3 being far or not to far into the previous traverse. Stop inventing. HTH.
-
Welcome back to a serious discussion.
-
I do not need luck. But I guess you and vienna will need some. Enjoy your kidding. Good trading to both of you. Such a waste of time...
-
I've already explained EVERYTHING about this part of the chart one needs to know.
-
He?? What about B2B and where is the rest?
-
Thanks for giving me a hand frenchfry.
-
A. This line doesn't carry any significance. I might have put it in real time when the market was creating a pennant on the 39th bar and simply forgot to remove it. Sorry for the confusion. B. The bar in question is a non dom movement of the faster fractal (dark green lines). No need to over-analyse it since it is confined by those lines. Look at the dominant tape (bars 36,37,38) of the faster fractal traverse (dark green). It goes all way through to the LTL so no FTT of the faster fractal traverse yet (dark green). What must come next?
-
Just reading your first sentence of the second paragraph makes me think. How can you possibly not care about "this fine fractal stuff" if the slower fractal can not reach completion unless this stuff you do not care about does? Schould I procede with every following sentence in your paragraph? Re. my chart. None of the bars could possibly be an FTT of the traverse. How can you expect a BO then? If there is no BO there can not be any FBOs.
-
LOL. Not only were you about to quote me but you actually quoted me... Anyway. The quote from Spyder dates back to the times where he jumped the fractals. You can ask him if you wish. Just check his posts after this one. Re. FBOs there aren't any.
-
No need to apologize. I can relate to your frustration. Re.fundamentals. BO or FBO have NOTHING... ZERO to do with the timeframe. The method we are discussing here is not timeframe driven, but event (sequences) driven. If you take your action on ftt (the "real" one) you can not expect any FBOs. What are they anyway? What is a BO? This is nothing else but market showing the dominance in the opposite direction. If you see any FBOs, than you just jumped the fractals. The market simply showed the dominance on a smaller (faster) fractal. Look at the highlighted bars. Why there was no way one could anticipate a BO? HTH.
-
I apologize. I didn't want to imply that I'm the only one who can answer your questions. As I see it, I can not answer your questions in a manner, that would seem acceptable to you. My apologies. By the way, you mixed up a couple of fundamentals in your question. This is why it is difficult to give a simple answer.
-
If you reverse on ftt of your fractal, you know what comes next. Based on that I can not answer your question.
-
Yes I do. It is still part of a down tape (skinny black lines) started by bars 4 and 5, so is the next bar 8. But this bar 7 alone doesn't have much importance in this context. HTH.
-
What does it mean to dominate something? You rule right? Now the black volume would have propelled the price higher, had it been dominant. Do you really see such a scenario on the bespoken bar? In other words... If you kick my ass and I don't feel it what does it tell me about your strike power?