BlowFish

There are instances where a trade can occur between best bid and best ask. Essentially it relies on orders arriving together that can be matched before being placed on the book.

Not sure what you are hoping to cover and where but I would be a bit cautious. Personally I am somewhat doubtful how much of a deterrent NDA's are against 'disclosing'.

I really don't like how they are storing data. I am all for using native file system and simple format files for storage when appropriate. Just did a bit of housekeeping and noticed that NT 7.0 creates thousands (literally) of files for data storage (I only have a few instruments I look at). Not particularly impressed by that. Windows is not great at handling very large quantities of small files. Just backing up and deleting was slightly painful.

Not making LH LL (for a short entry of course)?

It is an ambition of mine that either my trading gets simple enough or IB's charts get good enough for this to be a possibility

Yes, just recently. I decided not to invest much time in it. The reason being that historical bid and ask data are stored in separate data structures with only 1 second time stamp resolution. This make it impossible to reconstruct historical bid, ask and last data in the same sequence as it occurred real time. It has several other implications for other applications too.

3 crucial parameters are typical amount put at risk (in ticks will do), typical win size (again ticks are fine) and %winners. You need that info as a basis to evaluate anything much. This will indeed allow you to calculate expectancy but more importantly risk of ruin. These three parameters tend to have a direct effect on each other. For example if you decrease the amount you put at risk or increase your target % winners will drop.

Yes I think I understand how you use cumulative delta as a real time proxy for inventory/OI. I would have thought it might be interesting to compare with actual inventory holdings (obviously on the coarser time frame), figured you might notice interesting things that suggest refinements to your tools or there application. It should also be able to quantifiablly show how good a proxy it is. I have a hunch (not exactly sure why) that it might actually 'amplify' changes in inventory I don't think this would matter the way you are doing things (relatively rather than absolutely when it comes to inventory), it may even be desirable.

Grey I wonder if English is your first language? I think the way you write things might sound different to what you mean. Your write as if the way you do things is the only way to do them e.g.- In one post you say "formation of tweezers are on 1 min charts only" (patently false. they can form on any TF chart). In the next post you say" the main time frame for tweezers formation or exhaustion is 1 minute,". (At least this acknowledges they can exist elsewhere but is a judgement call expressed as a fact). They actually mean quite different things. What I think you actually mean is ' I use tweezers on a 1 minute chart' to detect exhaustion'? Just an observation. P.S. I am utterly useless at written English which I am sure shows despite me making an effort

Not enough info really there is a similar thread here http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f208/4-system-rules-would-you-choose-7562.html#post90520 that mentions some things people would want to know to evaluate performance.

I would want to know the typical Risk Reward too. I would tend to go with the highest % winners though if you where risking 4 to make 1 that might give me second thoughts. My guess is the last system is likely to have that sort of RR. High percentage systems allow you trade larger size with similar risk of ruin, however I simply find them easier to execute.Of course people want to risk 1 to make 10 and get 80% winners, aint gonna happen. It would be good to know the typical holding period and how long in the market each is. Something that trades 4 times a year and is always in might not suit many. I am not a systems trader but half the thing is to know when they are trading atypically the more information you have about expected performance the more you can tell when a system is deviating.

personally I would aggregate the two seeing as they are fungible. (actually I might aggregate all months in both contracts thus eliminating spreads). What he is saying is not that the ES has no longer term traders, just that the SP is a better instrument to look at to track there positions. I was more interested in the second vid trying to establish whether positions are 'directional' or hedges. As an aside have you tried comparing your delta based proxy for Inventory with actual Inventory (OI)? Even with actual data only available weekly it might reveal interesting info.

This is an interesting take on hedging vs trend following Commitment of Traders: Hedging vs Trend Following I am not sure I buy into the core assumption of the hedging indicator....too tired to think about it properly. It certainly appears to be worth thinking about

I am not a surfer but really like that metaphor. One of my favourite little books is called channel surfing (about channels needless to say) the author uses the metaphor liberally. I am quite wary of 'trading as war', or 'trading as combat' metaphors. That's just not me and whilst I enjoy a good argument (err I mean debate) I find 'real' conflict distressing, especially violent conflict. That was (as you might guess by now) not my main reason for linking the post. What I liked was the 'no nonsense' attitude to trading. Having read AM's posts in the thread I first mentioned (busy day tomorrow) I get the impression that this was deliberately pitched to be a 'harsh wake up call'' kind of post. I dunno. It is an interesting view in a thread that is quite similar to this one and does present the other side of the coin. Rather than know yourself perhaps know why you are trading, know what you want from the market, as Sekoyta intimates. I guess it is money that originally attracts people to the markets but once they are there they play out all sorts of other dramas. Is it even money that people really want (which is just bits in a bank) or the things that go with it? A sense of self worth, a job done well, respect of your peers, dare I say power? I guess you only need to know the bits of yourself that motivate and effect your interaction with the markets? I guess knowing your strengths and weaknesses is a plus but that is helpful for most endeavours isn't it?

I am not sure what that proves to be honest? I have never claimed to be an expert at WW's or even to trade them or even to be interested in trading them. Having said that I am interested in market geometry and price patterns and have a decent library of courses and books on that subject. I like to think I have a reasonable understanding of the topic and have traded simple channels in the past. Wolfes stuff does not particularly resonate with me, though there is some synergy with other things I am comfortable with. All I have done is point out that the rules are crystal clear and unambiguous I'll quote again from page 6 "Trend line of 1 to 3 and trend line of 2 to 4 must converge.".. My intention was simply to try to help clarify things, certainly not to intimate I was some sort of expert. I was kind of flabbergasted how adamant you where that this was wrong based on a couple of un-annotated charts.Again I am not saying that megaphones are not effective just that by definition they are not WW's. I have annotated the chart you posted with 3 different waves. I would certainly not have drawn them in real time. Hell I would never have drawn them if I wasn't looking for them to see whether they could be drawn! For that reason I am not really sure if there is any value in posting them. I also fudged them a bit, the entries where OK but a couple came up short on the targets. That effected my placement of point 1 (knowing whether price would hit target) that's the trouble with hindsight. I guess I should have done it 'honest'. I would not want to lead people astray as I said up top I am certainly no expert on Wolf. The main issue I have is that there are a couple of different ways of drawing point 1. Point 1 is the key point as 1-3-5 determines entry and 1-4-T determines target. Put another way change how you draw point 1 and everything changes. I think the thing to do probably is choose the most conservative point 1.

Funilly enough many do! The failure rate of traders and small businesses is remarkably similar too. As are the reasons, under capitalisation mainly, poor planning is significant too. Cory you might want to ask yourself why you want to trade based on guidelines rather than a proper plan? It is a common malaise, probably something we have all made excuses for in the past. I have a couple of theories why which where true for me at least. When you think about it there are a remarkable number of things you have complete control of. There is no excuse not to plan for those comprehensively. In fact about the only thing you don't is where price might go! If you look at a few examples in this thread you can quickly see that price will either do this, that, or the other. (You could substitute hit your target, hit your stop, or drift sideways if you like ). They are still eventualities that you can plan for in quite a simple fashion.

The good thing about pivots is they adjust for volatility based on the previous days range. The bad thing about pivots is that they adjust for volatility based on the previous days range. That means that they are great a lot of the time but after a break out of a narrow range day they are too narrow and after a wide day they are way to far apart. On a break out day you may hit R3/S3 after a wide range day you might want to use mid points. Why all this? Well one of the 'classic' ways to trade pivots is to use the lines themselves as stops as well as targets. They have the advantage of adjusting to the previous days range. S1 is probably too far away from a PP entry for scalping though You could perhaps use mid points of even the 25% point. This gives a passing nod to volatility. Price action confirmation works OK with pivots too (take a PA based break out at a pivot line) with a stop outside the previous swing high swing low. Pick a suitable bar size for how 'scalpy' you want to be. One thing I have noticed in the past is that you very often get a reaction of a point or two off these lines even if they subsequently break. I have a hunch you could come up with a fairly high probability 'scalp' strategy that capitalises on this though it might not be active enough for some people. Just a couple of ideas I have quite a fondness for pivots (though a while since they have been on my charts) and if you add a bit of longer term context (from the last few days) they can be pretty effective.

Clearly going senile it was actually posted here http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f37/trading-just-another-road-enlightenment-question-3712.html#post33723 in a thread that talks of similar things Actually the whole thread is good.

I was tempted to start a thread on Sekoytas quote "Every one gets what the want from the market". It is hard to know what you want from the market if you do not know yourself. The fact that many people do not make a profit would imply they are not really profit motivated? (if you buy into Ed's idea). I know with myself it was always a fight with the ego and every now and then still is. One of the good things that came from trading was a better awareness of myself, having said that too much navel gazing without specific purpose might well be counter productive. There is a great post by Anna-Maria in the long dormant "busy day tomorrow" thread that puts the counter point of view which is "just man up and do it". It's rather a long thread or I'd post the link.

I thought that was obvious, the course. Did you not read my posts where I quoted pieces? Hence the QED a few posts back. It is clear from the course and the follow up faxes that the lines must converge. It is you that re misleading people with your half baked ideas trying to reverse engineer the subject from the web site. Ask your trading friend, the Wolf expert if you don't believe me. Presumably you believe him. I m done with this smashing me head against a wall of foolishness here. I do wish you all the best with WW it would appear your 'variation' is effective which is all that matters

Decide what size swings you want to capture (working out roughly how big the swings actually are will help, do it by eyeball or more quantitative methods). Also decide if you want to take the major intraday swings or the smaller fluctuations. This will allow you to pick a TF chart that lets you see what you need to see to clearly identify those swings. Some people pick a larger chart for context and a smaller one for a trigger. I guess in short I am saying change your emphasis. Decide what you want and pick tools that let you achieve it. Sounds like you might be heading down the right path however, this is one of the few things we can control so it is worth devoting some effort to (imho).

Wow that sounds irresponsible! (Though is likely coincidence). In the past I have done some of my best trading after a drawdown (once I get over the numb feeling). Take your revenge by executing perfectly rather than doing more crazy stuff.

Indeed. However when the tactful approach falls on deaf ears then you have to be more direct. As Tams pointed out the advice in posts 2 and 3 still holds good. If you read the thread from the start you will see my posts where pretty 'tactful' and the first one that was remotely critical was explaining other peoples reticence to help further. Trading is a tough business at the best of times. I wonder whether I do people a dis service by being too tactful. I miss DBPhoenix's posts he used to get to the heart of the matter without much molly codling. I am probably far less blunt than Svensa or even Tams (I mean that in a good way) but it is always hard to tell people things they don't want to hear. There is an awful lot in trading that we (and I include myself) do not want to hear let alone accept, there is not much room for tact in those instances. Anyway Chloe is still talking to me (as are you so far!) and I am pleased about that

Because it doesn't bother me in the slightest, though my 'understanding' does not come from trying to piece together the methodology from the web site. Wolf puts it quite well Perhaps because I have sample waves on my website, many think that they are now "expert"in Wolfe Wave and decide to give trades and or ridiculous drawings. Believe me--they are wrong! You are wrong plain and simple Ask your friend, email Wolf or feel free to continue to disbelieve me (and WaveSlider) though I am not sure what you think we have to gain by lying. It is plainly stated over and over that they must converge. Perhaps he has purposely left a red herring or two on the website, or perhaps (more likely) you have missed the significance of the sweet zone and so have got point 1 wrong. I dunno. As I said before I guess we must agree to disagree though I am rather confused by why you should be so adamant.

Except maybe trading! Where knowing what you should do and actually doing it often are a metric mile apart!!