BlowFish

I am not sure why but the embedded charts don't open for me when I click on them. Strangely if I paste the link to the chart straight into a new browser tab they open fine? I wonder if this is the case for anyone else?

Trading Indicators - Traders Laboratory Though it depends on what charts you use.

Rigel, As Brooks would be the first to say (actually he does say) price action is price action. Having said that there is a wealth of his particular observations, if such and such happens so and so is more likely. There is a lot of these observations to digest. I am thinking that taking things slow (not my normal way of approaching things!) might be better just concentrating on the core concepts and then building on those.

The book arrived on the day I departed for a long weekend. Having returned now it was there waiting for me. The charts are a wee bit small but then again I probably need reading glasses. I can make out what is going on. The layout could be a bit better too (greater use of white space to ensure charts and notes are one the same page).

Depends on what you are doing. If you are trading off intra day charts with a few studies it s absolutely fine for most purposes. If you want full automation I would be wary. It is worth noting that under certain conditions that IB snapshot data (though you get multiple 'ticks' per second these might contain aggregated transactions at the same price) For most applications this is absolutely fine.

I quite like Amazon.com: Studies in Tape Reading (Fraser Publishing Library) (Fraser Contrary Opinion Library Book): Rollo Tape: Books Neils tape reading and market tactics is good too but a lot of overlap with studies in tape reading. "The Undeclared Secrets That Drive The Stock Market" by Tom Williams is pretty good too http://www.geniechartist.com/default/vsa.php Amazon.com: Reminiscences of a Stock Operator (Wiley Investment Classics): Edwin Lefèvre, Roger Lowenstein: Books This is one of my favourite books period. It is not specifically about volume though it is covered.

That is a lot more complicated than his more recent versions! The one I have in tradestation the 'meat and potatoes; is about 5 lines. I think it is the most recent, he seems to have simplified the logic greatly. In short comparing is unlikely to be productive

The latter, the full course represents about 40 years of his work and research. He is an inveterate researcher and there is a vast amount of material. That would be my biggest criticism, actually! Whist it is comprehensive and efficacious there are much more straightforward ways to trade. It is likely to take thousands of hours of study to really 'get it'. The most powerful aspects are his ideas how price moves (though experienced traders will find some familiarity). The (rigorous and unambiguous) classification of types of market action (e.g. trend, congestion entrance, congestion, congestion exit etc.). And the big one - multiple time frame analysis which looks at the subtle interaction of all of his tools and techniques on multiple time frames.

I subscribed to see if that gave access to the images. Sadly it didn't so I have sent an email to their support people. I guess they got lost in the wash somwhere.

My couple of posts did not really help matters so in the interest of preserving the peace I apologise. I do think there is a strong argument that his (T's) price action stuff is more important than perhaps is given credit. I will continue to lurk and see if that is addressed over time. Cheers.

I use media player classic (a basic lightweight media player) with the K-Lite codec pack (codecs for just about everything you might want to play). Doesn't answer your question but is an alternative way to view them.

Interesting you measuring with respect to time to determine pressure. Makes some sense to me too.

Because this is a forum. A forum is a medium for open discussion, the voicing of ideas and opinions. If you would like to exclude people by their level of knowledge or any other criteria you might have, Trader Laboratory supports private threads, perhaps that might suite your purposes better? Probably a private mailing list would be even better, you can set them up so you have complete editorial control and can censor to your hearts content. Perhaps you could have some sort of test procedure to ensure people have an adequate level of knowledge? You could also summarily ban people for suggesting sticking to a single cycle. Oh btw when you mention pissing contests in 9 posts within couple of days I think it is clear who has their fly undone here. I will have a side bet, you will have to have the last word on this, you might want to look up hypocrisy when you look up forum. I will re-iterate my Taylor hunch. Three different people can use 3 different books and still enjoy success. This seem to me to strongly suggest it is Taylors price action observations that are the key to success with his method? .....Of course...... as I am not elovemer.......my ideas.......are not worth a ...... ......

If you post both studies (TS code will have to be text) I'll have a quick eyeball for you......not promising anything though.

The book didn't arrive in time for my weekend away, however the free info (linked in the other thread) has a wealth of information. I don't know why but I thought you had ordered the book too? He pretty much does what you have mentioned and that is look for strength or weakness in the first couple of bars/candles after the gap. He doesn't make any assumption on direction (fill or further move in the gap direction) but his observation is that gaps often lead to strong trends so he gets ready for that eventuality.

If you read the code through carefully you should be able to get it right without too much (any?) testing. Of course I appreciate you wanting to test it however It is really just 5 conditionals so careful scrutiny of the code should be able to get a bug free conversion.

Trouble using currencies to compare is that every feed will have different volumes. If you are debugging a volume based indicator you might be better off comparing an exchange traded instrument?

I think you ordered the AL Brooks book Brown? (I did too). In his presentations he talks about gaps, he is neutral on direction until price action dictates it. however his observation is that gaps frequently result in trend days (one direction or the other).

If you want to understand more you might want to get a copy of Harris (or O'Hara). He does an excelent job of describing different types of trader why and how they trade, different dimensions of liquidity hwo provides it who takes it etc. It is a tangled web. of course this wont allow you to say ah ha that spike must be x y or z but personally I found it a fascinating read. "Trading Exchanges & Market Microstructure for Practitioners" is the title. Mind expanding, and in places mind blowing.

Fair enough. I have to say I didn't post code mainly out of respect to UB's work though sent code privately to a few people. I am comfortable that ninja and zenfire are getting the data that is required accurately. I would bet you a penny to a pound that it is more accurate than the TS setup. I think maybe 'accuracy' is not your issue. I wonder if what sets the OP's charts apart are filtering and smoothing? The underlying principles I think are probably well understood by people and not what's at issue. My early code (which was only a proof of concept in ninja) whilst ragged looking and not as 'nice' as the originals seams to reveal the same behaviour. There will also be visual differences due to how TS plots stuff. If I get 500 contracts with the same time stamp (this could be one 500 lot or 500 one lots) NT will display this as 5 or 6 bars. I keep 'ramping up' the intensity in this case which seems appropriate behaviour if the change in time is 0. The fact that UB's charts dont have many series of bars where ohlc are all the same suggests to me TS isn't plotting correctly because they occur in Ninja and Multicharts all day long with 100 contract bars. This maybe has the effect of emphasising those high intensities in TS. Sometimes flaws in implementation produce desirable artefacts. My method of carrying over intensities emphasises them too. (i posted some charts earlier in the thread where you can see this 'sawtooth' effect). Hope that made some sense (lucidity goes down hill after midnight) and might give you some things to look at. btw I have mentioned before but it bears repeating...I think if you get a decent low (or zero) lag smoother you might be pretty impressed with the results. You could try Hursts or one of Ehlers maybe. My hunch is that might be the 'secret sauce', mind you a dull old ema would probably do.

Yes MC seems OK as does Ninja. As UrmaBlume points out as you are dealing with intensity (volume/time) it shouldn't matter.

Here's something that bothers me does tradestation plot Constant Volume bars correctly? For example with CV 100 bars. If you have a bar already with 95 contracts in and an order for 150 contracts completes will tradestation a) complete the first bar b) plot a full 100 vol bar c) start plotting an incomplete bar with 45 contracts?? I had a feeling it was one of these apps that stuffed everything into one bar?

One might guess that when the intensity is a couple of standard deviations from the mean (of a suitable sample) that someone is up to something.

The link appears to be broken UB, I am getting a 404?

Indeed. However I was not complaining just pointing out the facts of the matter. I also bet with bucket shops too, no axe to grind by me. Funnily enough I was invited for drinks and to watch the soccer last night by one of the 'bookies' I have an account with. Good fun and quite candid about there business models (in different divisions) You might be surprised. I do wonder why one would trade (well bet) in an unregulated environment where your funds are not particularly secure when you can trade in a well regulated environment with better protection? (my reasons are pretty specific tax free and better flexibility with position sizing). As to the spreads that is not the issue it is the fills that are important. Of course if the underlying market is trading at 76 x 81 (for example) how can your bookmaker give better prices without taking a loss right of the bat? The only way they can recoup their losses are if you loose. Actually unless they can hedge every position (which they can't) the only way they can make money on unhedged parts of there portfolio is through customers loosing. Size and frequency of bets is also big factor too. Having said that it is possible to make money but if you are marginal then trading in a regulated market might be all you need to become profitable. Actually there is a thread here somewhere about just how that was the case for some guy. Again I have no complaints, these guys need to make money but you should understand how they make it.