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.
amisme
-
Content Count
42 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by amisme
-
2/22 chart and debrief for your reading pleasure I dislike that I am lacking in tape-level volume annotations, but with the clear dominance changes in volume, I felt these had to be traverses. Volume below that fractal level was usually not clear to me. Due to time zones, I will refer to bars by bar number. Of note: bar 17 may be discounted as a possible FTT because bar 18 closed inside the range of bar 17. I did not think this was meaningful on this resolution level, but I read a bar-by-bar recently where Spydertrader discounted a bar as a possible FTT because the close of the next bar did not break that bar's boundaries. I'll watch for this from now on and see how it holds up. Bar 19 was a volume peak, followed by a bar on somewhat less volume but with drastically less volatility. I've learned to watch for this as an indicator of an FTT. Price is failing to go further into the trend despite having high volume behind it. As bars 19 and 20 shared the same high, I called bar 20 the FTT for the purpose of drawing trend lines. FTT of the following down traverse was more difficult for me. Bar 27 was a VE and first bar of a lateral, so I was anticipating a return to dominance before picking an eligible FTT bar. Bar 32 gave me that, but with price action not ending the lateral it was a few bars later before I decided to call it an FTT. Should have paid more attention to the trend lines. Price gave some hints when it got near the RTL, then turned and punched through it. Similar situation with the next FTT, though I was better prepared for it.
-
Awkward carryover. Channels still elude me. I tried drawing in an up channel, using 12:30 bar of 2/15 as point 1 and 12:30 bar of today as point 3, but didn't feel good about it. I'm changing a lot of what I thought I knew about drawing price containers and the volume on that time frame is not clear to me.
-
I've never decided for certain what should be done with these partial days. The character of the market is so different, it reminds me of what Jack said about why after-hours trading is irrelevant to intraday fractal continuation. Is the character of a partial trading day sufficiently in line with RTH trading to be a part of our continuous fractals? Regardless, whatever just happened did not break the up traverse from last Friday.
-
Revised 2/17/2012 chart. Tomorrow I look for a new traverse down or an FBO and continuation of up traverse. Thanks everyone who provided input on my last few days. I've gotten a lot of good tips specifically on how I should be reading volume and defining tapes.
-
A sleepy day. I am not certain that these are traverses rather than tapes. Annotating them as traverses requires that I ignore my rule of always requiring a visible FTT to end a tape. This was discussed earlier in the thread and did not seem to have a conclusion as to whether or not the tape end effect had to be visible on a 5m ES chart. When it came down to it, I decided I'd rather treat them as traverses than tapes.
-
I see an up traverse in the early day that VEs and accelerates steeply. At 10:15, I get flummoxed. Starting a lateral there is the only way I can see things making sense, except that the second bar breaks the high of the first bar by one tick. So it is not a lateral formation in the ten cases sense, but it just...works, laterally. I'm not sure if I'm learning something I should be learning or making up my own thing that will cause me trouble later. The up traverse starts yesterday (going by cnms2's corrections), but the tape expansion and slope change in the early day today prompted me to use the 07:00 bar to set the slope of the up traverse container. Two spots on this chart I don't quite like. I'll be coming back to this later to see what it looks like after I've stepped away for a bit.
-
That clears things up quite a bit, but also conflicts with what I thought was a tenet of drawing price containers. I'm reworking my logic in that regard. I will start tomorrow from the context of an up tape breaking out of a completed down traverse. Thank you for the correction!
-
This is late. I had a day. Realized a little ago that this is pretty near the end of the day for you on the east coast. Had some trouble today between points 2 and 3 of what I have annotated as a down tape in the latter portion of the day. The 10:05 bar is a VE of the tape even at the most accelerated possible slope. Thus, non-dom price movement following that bar is an expansion of the tape, not a new tape. I will need to see a non-dom sub-tape movement complete, followed by a return to dominance and completion of that sub-tape container before I can call this tape complete. Annotating this gave me a few challenges. Outside bar at 11:05 is a VE of any container I tried to draw. I was at a loss. Price following the 11:05 OB traveled downward far enough to break the lower boundary of the 10:05 bar, which would have made my non-dominant up thing into a down-thing. I don't believe that's a valid way to annotate, so I took another look and realized that the 10:35 bar forms a lateral that goes until 12:05. Does this mean that the high of the 11:05 bar is a valid sub-tape FTT? I don't know, maybe! It made everything work. This gives me tape point 3, and I move on to catch up with the day. Following tape point 3, sub-tape down container progresses without trouble, though I am a little befuddled at how the volume turned out. Our first tape FTT for this tape, a small hop up and a lateral gives us FBO. One bar lands exactly on the RTL as drawn, which gives me a nice feeling of confirmation. Price breaks out of the lateral down on increasing volume and a new dominant sub-tape movement has begun. The rest of the day didn't seem very tricky to me. Second FTT of that tape and a successful breakout of the RTL means that we start tomorrow looking for that tape to end and give us point 3 of a down traverse. If we instead get an up traverse, then I will have been wrong in my reasoning for expanding the tape.
-
Fractal differentiation for today. I didn't like having a traverse with such a shallow slope, and having a tape go from 08:55 to 12:35 was weird to me. But everything worked, and at the end, I have exactly two FTTs on the traverse level: 06:55 bar, and 12:35 bar.
-
outsource, I'm having a difficult time understanding what you are asking for. Having PRV volume calculated on a tic chart is not possible because the bars are not time-based. If you are looking for an indicator that shows a moving average of volume over the last x seconds/minutes, I've thought that that could be fantastically useful. I would work on coding it up myself, but I'm currently prioritizing improving my fractal differentiation. Towards that end, I've been reviewing the basics and questioning a lot of things I thought I'd had straightened out. Looking over the beginnings of the thread, the lateral drill suddenly makes a lot more sense to me, and potentially has a very simple solution. Two things seem to be the most important when considering the context of your lateral: 1. What fractal your lateral occurs on 2. What part of the sequence that fractal is completing With that information, laterals fall into two categories. Non-dominant movements after a dominant movement has reached LTL - continuation Non-dominant movements after a dominant movement has failed to traverse - change For simplicity's sake, I'm considering the first movement from point 1 to point 2 to be a dominant move that reaches LTL. Given that, the only thing left in my mind is to differentiate between FTTs that lead to new containers and FTTs that lead to FBO. I do not know where to start with this.
-
Here is something I keep thinking I have answered, but then I find myself questioning it later. I figure I may as well bring it up here, and see what the rest of you have to say. Is it a requirement of an FTT that it be a higher high or lower low than the point 2 of the container? For example, let's say I have points 1-2-3 of a down traverse. Price forms a small down tape after point 3, does not go lower than point 2, then reverses up and passes point 1, unarguably ending the container. Volume does support the annotation of down traverse. The only thing that brings it in question for me is that dominant price movement after the point 3 does not pass point 2 before unmistakably breaking out and ending the container.
-
I interpreted it as saying that price must reach the cyan region in order for you to have a new pt3 of the old container, not that the new pt3 had to occur in the cyan region.
-
Looks like you got Trade Navigator playing nice. I had a problem similar to what you mentioned in the other thread when I gave it a trial run - spent more time trying to select and move lines than anything else, even at 1x speed. Was that something they changed, or did you just learn to work with it? Sorry I don't have anything to contribute re: laterals at this time. I've got a ways to go yet before I am at that level.
-
10-7-11 ES 5m. Had a late start so the first 2 hours or so are hindsight. Someday I might develop clearer volume annotation habits. It's a work in progress. Re: bar 31, I considered it to be an unusually large price movement on a sub-tape fractal that did not take up enough chart space to annotate. A puzzle, though, to deal with in real time. If I am correct and the weekend doesn't change anything, Monday will start out looking for a pt3 of a down traverse. I am sometimes dubious about weekend carryover though, it's a lot of time for sentiment to change in the minds of the market participants. Waiting too long for confirmation on an FTT is definitely my biggest problem right now. I may start shooting for entries on pt3s and see how that treats me. I am glad to see that our charts for today are very alike.
-
When I looked at the software thread, there were a few tools in development or that used to work for generating a final universe, but the only working one I know of right now is the tool set for Trade Navigator. I can pm you a link to the thread and the current universe.
-
That is true. To give a more thorough answer to BillyRay and islandboyz, for the purposes of this method, it does not matter in the slightest why someone chooses to trade the ES. A trader trading based off a comparison of the ES and the S&P 500 is no different from a trader trading for any other reason. In other words, all volume is created equal, as far as we are concerned. If BillyRay was to say that in his 25 years, he has found a methodology that would be concerned with this, I would not have a reason to disagree. I'm sure there are many ways to look at volume, with many different results.
-
If I understand right, what he is describing is the basis for the str/sq tool that is discussed in the ET threads, yes? Tracking the difference between the futures contract and the underlying commodity to better identify small trend changes. Other than that he is definitely talking about price and volume, but not in the way that the thread is about.