BlowFish

As someone said earlier in the thread they are not drop, base, rally they are rally, base, rally. There was supply and demand anywhere a trade has occurred (a buyer met a seller) not all make sense as potential trade locations. I don't think its beyond you, you just need to dig a bit deeper. If you look at the wealth of free Sieden stuff it is all described in some detail. Actually the problem is sifting through the reams and reams of it and extracting the nuggets. For example the drop base rally stuff is described (as someone told you earlier in the thread). Another important thing is 'how the train left the station', strong momentum indicates that there is a greater imbalance in supply and demand. Risk reward is another important thing....ahh you might say that's just a money/trade management thing....no it also indicates how far the buyers/sellers could push price from where supply/demand was in balance. Another tip he gives is to look back to the origin of the move, that pretty much rules out pull backs. You also mention multiple touches, Sieden will only take the very first touch of a zone (second touch too if lots of other odds enhancers line up). Sure multiple touches indicate that the zone was strong but the first touch the imbalance is much more likely to still exist, every subsequent touch is likely to weaken the zone and diminish your odds. Sounds like you have made up your mind Gabe maybe Whyckoff would jive better with you? Personally I think Sam adds a couple of useful ideas to the supply/demand S/R, however I think if you are prepared to persevere a bit and dig deeper you might be rewarded. Incidentally I met him once and talked at some length about discretion and consistency in defining zones, guess that's a post for another day.

Did you define a variable StartCalcDate ?

At the risk of repeating myself....actually it's all been said earlier in the thread so I shan't

A simple price chart does not display all the readily available information about a financial data series. There are three main variables price, time (from the start of the sample or from the last tick) and volume. When you construct a chart you tend to hold one of those constant (to construct a bar). If you display all (e.g a simple time based chart with volume histogram) I think it will be obvious what is random and what is real. Many years ago there was a website you go to and take a test. It simple presented a series of charts (price only) and asked you to select whether it was real or random. (A cursory look and I could not find it today). I remember when I took it there where only a couple of charts that threw me. Real price charts have 'characteristics' that seem pretty rare in random data.

Not sure you will get much response the thread has been dead for almost 4 years and Tin Gull has not been around for almost as long.

Have a look in the Whyckoff (and the VSA section to some extent) section there is lost of information on 'tests'. A top run is where price is marked up or down to trigger resting orders...most people have got a pretty good idea where they are likely clustered. Price direction is simply the direction price moves away from somewhere.

Firstly I would ask wherever you heard it. Secondly I think there is more to it than that. For example a seller may bid up the price to 'test' supply and demand at those levels (of for a variety of other reasons). Broadly speaking you can assume who one by price direction tests and stop runs not withstanding.

No one is using a 'coin toss' as a 'model'. The original poster was simply working through some ideas. To do this he decided to hold a couple of variables constant... outcome (50%) win (1 unit) loss (1 unit). At some stage of course he will need to untether those variables. There are only a handful of variable in a RoR calculation and it is quite valid to hold those constant while you worth things out from the start. Why don't you start a thread 'GBM for modelling risk'? So far in this thread we have not talked about modelling risk which is a different game. As an aside, the last time I sat in a room with a bunch of quants and asked 'forgive my naivety but isn't Monte Carlo simulation good enough?' The short answer was unequivocal, 'yes, it is'. Incidentally just looking at that GBM page you linked and it seemed flawed to me (though it's at about the edge of my maths ability). For anyone that is not so easily seduced by tecnobabble here is a good site that explains basic RoR principle in a clear and straightforward manner. TradersCALM - risk of ruin menu

A quick note on trend following. If you have a feel for RoR you will see that having a low number of % winners has a large effect on draw down and RoR. This means you need a large account to size properly. This is one of the main reasons it is not suitable for many. Oh, that and the fact that many trend followers will want to trade multiple instruments (with varying bet sizes in each) to help smooth the week to week equity curve.

OK I see what direction you are coming from thanks.

Be interested where you go with this, a neglected subject that really should be a mandatory part of trading 101. The brain is a bit sluggish at the moment but I am not sure it makes sense (to me) to divorce account size and bet size from the equation. The main parameters to RoR are expectation of outcome (50:50) in our case, bankroll and bet size. Just having difficulty getting my head around how you have abstracted things. Again you can make bet and bank constant arbitrary values but I need to think if that actually allows them to be dropped from the equation. To lazy for thinking right now Having said that looking at 'streakiness' is a pretty valuable exercise, many trading approaches do seem to yield 'streaks' (probably due to cycling market conditions).

Edit: OK ignore below the line. It would appear to be the real problem is that 'unread posts' returns a load of threads that don't actually have new posts in them. I just expected a lot more actual new posts _______________________________________________________________________ After you click on 'unread posts' you get a list of threads with new posts....great so far. The icon next to the thread title that used to take you to the first unread POST in the thread seems to have gone missing?

Personally if the information is not based on underlying principles it is at best of dubious value (imvho) at worse.....well I am sure you can work it out. UB has generously shared enough information about his indicators to come up with ones own implementations of them. (well with suitable skills I suppose). Of course he has had quite a long time to twiddle with pre and post processing but every one has there own favourite approaches to that thorny old chestnut and at the end of the day it is not that determines the usefulness of the indicator. Anyway I guess I have missed the webinar by now, shame, I'd have liked to attend. @Brown nice to see you are still around, few of the 'old hands' post with anything like regularity nowadays.

I may have missed this earlier in the thread (forgive me if so, didn't have time to re-read the whole thread). Your last post intimates how you approach this, but how do you determine targets Phantom? Personally determining the potential R:R before a trade is pretty key to me in deciding if it's a trade I want to take and if so what size to go in with. Obviously to determine that you need to anticipate where price might go before you consider pulling the trigger. I'm guessing you might approach things slightly differently form things you have said in the past. Arguably exits are a much trickier proposition than entries.

Good to see you are still around Marko

And you! TL needs threads of the claibre of your magnum opus if it is to be one of the top destinations for traders.

That's the one ---

Harsh but true. Many people (especially vendors) make false claims about their trading 'credentials'. The original meaning of pretender was anyone who made a claim to the throne (legitimately or fabricated) in common use nowadays it means to make false claim. Just to be clear I am not suggesting Normans claims are false, just that many trading vendors are. Sadly most will not. The point is that it does not vindicate them being a pretender in the past. Apologies, I am in a particularly sceptical mood today....I blame the hangover :beer::cheers::sleep: :doh:

So it is fixable then, I guess they are fortunate then? To contrast the US national debt goes up by 4 billion a day (and has been for years) which makes the UK's trillion (total) seem paltry. I obviously don't understand macro economics but I wonder what these nations need to do to get junk status?

One has to ask oneself whether a vendor of 'self help' type products is best equipped to 'supply traders with a way to be more disciplined and focused in their trading.' One thing you can say about Hallett is that he certainly understands internet marketing. I would also question whether there are only a 'handful of people that give a darn'. There are a plethora of people that provide these sorts of products and services to traders. Many are psychologists (with recognised professional qualifications such as a PhD) that have chosen to specialise in the (lucrative) trading arena. One has to assume they 'give a darn' when there income depends on it.

Without 'context' I'd bet it's about 50/50. Of course you could easily make that 30/70 or 70/30 by adjusting stops and targets (R:R). There are many more variables than a simple entry pattern that determine 'win rate'.

It's worth remembering that most 'indicators' that purport to lead price only do so (allegedly) based on assumptions that are pretty much false. Having said that things like trend lines or channels can project potential future turning points. (or even plain old S/R). Some might even argue that volume leads price (debatable, arguably a price will or will not attract volume). I'd be interested to know what you consider 'leading'?

I think he started offering a paid for system/services. It was modestly priced (or used to be), Partly due to conflict of interest and partly due to the energy required to keep threads like his going I guess he stopped posting here and devoted hie energy there. Having said that his site seems to have gone.

Looks like trying to find trend in a plate of spaghetti to me Still if it helps you 'see it' that's all that matters.

Figuring out other peoples code is a great way too, chances are someone has done it (or done similar) before when it comes to EL. Tackling little projects (as you have) is probably as good a way as any too. Oh I should mention that there was probably an ulterior motive in Tams original advice The act of setting out exactly want you want to do will often give clues for a solution to you. If it is more complicated break things down into smaller manageable chunks. Maybe I should not have dived in quite so quickly!