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.
plantrader
-
Content Count
47 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by plantrader
-
What or who is "JHM"?
-
Thanks for the reply & opinion. That was my understanding of it also. It's good to hear what others who've been using this method for many years believe. Anyone else? The topic about continuation (run-on tapes/traverses with multiple cycles) that necessitates RTL fanning vs legit change didn't go anywhere, maybe we can revisit that one again soon.
-
That was my point, and is why I asked the question. I simply read the responses for what they were, as varying understandings of this method. Now we're getting somewhere, a discussion. Apparently, some folks don't require a FTT as long as they have full volume sequence on the necessary fractals. You say we need a FTT, I happen to agree. Now the question is to you...which fractal(s) do you feel need a FTT? Both, either/or?
-
Thanks, much appreciated. Sounds like for you (and spyder), as long as volume cycles complete, nothing actually has to FTT and ending on VEs is fine. Please let me know if I've misunderstood you and you do require at least "something" (some speed of container) to literally FTT no matter what. It sounds like you don't.
-
Thanks for the reply. Then in this instance (as an isolated question) the Traverse could have ended on a VE bar, correct? Now for a general question, allowing that volume and other factors may impact your viewpoint, to end what you call a Traverse (I call it a tape, same thing) do you require "anything" to FTT, if not your Traverse then your Tape? Either/or? Or not necessarily either?
-
Stepan, since FTTs are part of the material, are you up for saying whether you'd ever end a Traverse on a VE bar? If yes, would the faster thing (tape) have to FTT, or do you feel both need to FTT? By definition, a VE is not a "failure to traverse" (it did traverse), so I'm just wondering what your long-timer view is. In the chart I posted, isolating only the question I asked... your Traverse ends on a VE. On that day (yesterday) it may not have ended there, but I'm only asking about that specific aspect. Edit: I'm not sure what your view is, because you say on VE wait for next bar, but the next bar is the inside bar of a FBP which is a short formation & therefore means the inside bar can't be the FTT bar. Nobody else has given an opinion on whether they personally feel both the faster speed & medium speed need to FTT in order to deem the medium speed thing as ended. Do you guys think it's either/or, or do both have to? It's just opinion stuff, guys, don't be shy. If your experience tells you something, right or wrong, what is it? You don't have to know that you're "right".
-
Stepan7, thanks for the chart. I see what I'm calling a BBT and Tape, you're calling a Tape and Traverse. Using your terminology & the markup of the chart I posted, your Traverse doesn't FTT. It ends on a VE, but your Tape does FTT. Your view, and what you've found over the years is that that's Ok? Remember, the assumption is that we get a valid down Traverse after that (forget that it was yesterday's chart & something else happened afterwards; using this as simple illustration of a general question). I'm only asking whether both speeds need to FTT in order to end the Traverse. Or is it fine if only the Tape FTTs and not the Traverse? Or if only the Traverse FTTs but not the Tape?
-
Very interesting. I take it you used custom code in ninja to force the open to always match the close of each bar? Why did you do it? Is that something the original method creators suggested, or is it something you discovered? Can you expand on the rationale or benefit or how it came to be? Aside from that, let's say you ended up on a given tape with the same TL/FTT situation I described, then what? Do both speeds have to FTT, or is it an either/or type of thing?
-
What do you mean by that? Matched open with close, in relation to what? Maybe a visual would help.
-
Sure, here's one. I'm only showing price, in order to isolate the question I'm asking. I didn't want to comb back through charts, so I'm using today and have modified one TL to illustrate my question (i know it's not a correct TL now). Assumptions: We have 3 BBTs, each with a 123ftt, and the overall Tape (green TLs) has a full volume cycle and incr vol after Pt3. Also assume we get a valid down tape after this. That sets the stage for what I'm really asking, which is can we FTT the tape when the slower thing (tape TL) are a VE, but the faster thing (BBT TL) does FTT? Or is it vice versa, we have to FTT the Tape (green TL) but it's Ok if the faster thing ends on a VE? Or do both have to FTT no matter what?
-
Stepan, thanks for the replies & info. Related question, for you & everyone... do you find that a slower thing (what I call a Tape; medium speed thing) HAS to FTT or can the slower thing FTT on a VE bar as long as the "faster" thing truly does FTT? And similarly, what if the slower thing FTTs but the faster does not? Either/or can FTT, as long as one of them does? Or both have to? Or just the slower thing has to FTT and the faster does not necessarily? My assumption is that the slower thing HAS to FTT no matter what, even if the faster thing doesn't. Anyone have observation-based opinions on that re: what you've found has the most credibility overall? Maybe in the end, it doesn't matter, who knows.
-
Thanks river. Sounds more or less similar to #2 in my list, basically act upon what you think is a FTT and manage the trade accordingly from there. Assuming fractals, volume cycle, etc, are all suitable for the entry.
-
This is similar to a recent topic, so I thought I'd continue it. Anybody interested in sharing their views & techniques for recognizing an FTT that remains an FTT vs a false one & we get trend continuation? I'm thinking in terms of a medium speed, some of you call it a BBT, some of you call it a Tape & some of you call it a Traverse. In case it seems like I'm asking an unanswerable question, I do understand that identifying accurate FTTs in real-time is the most difficult part of the method (and very easy on historical static charts). Just wondering about techniques and perspectives anyone might use. Generally, FTT plus a SOC (signal of change) is what we'd use for a trading decision. While also noting that we need to be 'on cycle' (finished a volume cycle). Still, in real-time that combo of factors will often occur many times in a trend before it finally ends. RTL cross comes into play also, but will obviously usually increase the risk if we wait that long to enter (which is fine of course). Even RTL cross can be a false signal, as continuation may occur & we have to fan the RTL subsequently. Here are some starter answers: 1) Wait for a slower RTL cross; bbt, tape or traverse RTL, whatever your version of the method calls it. 1.a) Even if we're on-cycle with volume and have a FTT & SOC, and wait for a RTL cross we'll still often have to end up fanning the RTL due to continuation after a false reversal. Any additional tips? 2) FTT plus SOC plus RTL cross, enter trade then simply manage the trade and exit/stopout as needed. That's all one can do, and no way around it. If so, that's understandable of course, but am trying to cover all bases rather than making assumptions. Hey, you never know what someone else might "know"! 3) FTT plus SOC plus RTL cross, then also wait for IV (incr vol) in the direction of reversal before entering? Often this entry might have to be using PRV (prorated vol), I assume, in order to avoid waiting for a bar close & funking up the risk:reward ratio. 4) Other volume-based ways to tell if a potential FTT is likely to have efficacy or whether it'll end up moot and should be ignored in real-time? Troughs, peaks, etc?
-
Stepan, most of those seem to amount to a 2-bar formation with an internal (SYM, FBP, etc) with a BO to the dom side. To summarize, then that's a "hold" because it's not a signal for change yet, even if it could be a a FTT bar technically. Is that a fair summary or not really? What I'm wondering is, what if those BO bars (the last bar in each diagram) is on decreasing volume? That is some sort of SOC in an of itself, in that case. So would that change the perspective, or would it still be a "hold" due to how it occurred? Could you expand or share your views on this angle?
-
One problem I've noticed on this blog is that folks tend to get caught up in the fact that they "know something", and are obviously proud of it. So, instead of open discussion and Q&A, which might lead to an epiphone or two...it turns into a monologue/lecture, or riddles where one person is setting the other straight. Via their expertise either real or imagined. Or insinuating that someone hasn't analyzed, studied, nor learned anything. That's always a good one.
-
If the two bars are translating (up in this case), you can't draw a non dom TL even if the bar is an ibgs. He must've been referencing something like this: if we're in an up move, then a bar makes a "lower low" but it's close is such that it's an ibgs long (which means technically it's a mode up/black bar)...we could still draw a non dom TL to it. Edit: Or an upwards translating bar that's an ibgs short and happens to intersect an existing up TL. Since the ibgs bar's mode is red/down it'd be a valid potential non dom TL. This happens a lot, and a lot FTT bars fit such a description. I'd show this but am not at my PC right now. My question is, to fit that definition of "complex" do we have to have a 123ftt in the non dom direction? Or simply the possibility of drawing a non dom TL even if not a valid container (no ftt) is enough to make it complex?
-
In the snipet cnms posted, what I was getting at is confirming that what spyder called a traverse is what we'd currently call a BBT, agreed? The 2nd container not being valid is the main reason why, otherwise it'd be a tape. Or if he considers that 2nd container having FTT'd, why? It's not a sym confirming lat, which means we can't use it's internal volume. But it did exit the opposite side that it formed.
-
Cnms, thanks, is it true that the 1st tape having it's own volume cycle is irrelevant in this case as far as what makes it a tape? I ask, because the other two tapes don't have a full cycle yet the red thing is called a traverse. So in this example, a traverse is simply 3 123ftt containers and at least one overall vol cycle (not required in each tape)? Edit: actually the 2nd container doesn't seem to have a FTT. So overall, this is just 1 container with a vol cycle, as a Traverse?
-
Hard to keep up with your post edits/updates. If only you knew anything about my trading and whether I was profitable or not, at that point you'd have a basis for commenting. Right now, you don't have any idea. And similarly, it's more important for you to be a know-it-all yelling guru and constantly change the topic to maintain your appearance of guruism than it is to actually discuss things calmly for mutual benefit. ANYBODY know admin so we can have the last 20 posts or so, each by gucci and myself to be removed? Complete waste of space on the blog and needless nonsense.
-
Thanks for that clarification, got it. The latter seems more tradeable in and of itself but I can't claim to understand the full details of how spyder specifically traded so I could be mistaken.
-
Agreed completely. That's what I was trying to do, but the subject would get changed rather than coming to terms on terminology. Discussion is pointless if we can't do that first.
-
You're far too much of a 'guru' to discuss this stuff with. Have fun condescending to someone else. I've learned plenty and no, 2 bars was not in any way similar to the definition of a tape I've learned. At a minimum, a Tape needs a volume cycle (r2r2b2r or b2b2r2b) and either 1 container or 3 containers. THAT is why I was asking, because I know there are varying ways to view and handle this method. Took you a day to answer my question, and you could have spared me the rude bullshit in between.
-
I asked you first. Direct question requested... direct question received.
-
Nice day. It's Sim trading or live? And is 1 car = 1 contract? Don't understand the verbiage.
-
I was thinking the same thing. I was trying to find out what your definition of a tape or traverse is, as far as containers go, and you start exclaiming about laterals. There are varying interpretations floating around for how to differentiate the components of such fractals. What is a tape, to you?