Trading The Wyckoff Way

[DbPhoenix 42]

I hope Db or anybody else does not mind when I try to answer questions directed to him. If it is a problem please just let me know. I do it because I shape my own thoughts better when I write about them and I can also recieve some feedback to what I think. But if somebody finds it inappropriate (I kind of feel it is, at least a bit) I will hold back and let Db or somebody else with more experience answer.

 

You're doing just fine. If charts are needed, there are dozens posted throughout the forum and in my blog.

[SunTrader 10]

Talk nowadays in the market is that there needs to be capitulation for a bottom to be confirmed. There have been many times in the past when there was no "capitulation" as the term is commonly understood. Rules are good except they don't work always in all markets/all the time.

[Head2k 10]

To return to the original subject of this thread, I have one question for you, atto.

Looking back at your example in this post

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f131/exits-and-scale-outs-4805.html#post51694

I think you could as well use all in / all out approach. All out at your marked scale-out points and all in at virtually any better price. You could consider it as one trade still, just exiting and re-entering. You already said that you eventually add to your position on some occasions. This would be similar, just you wouldn't take anything through those pullbacks. To comply with your decreasing edge theory you could use smaller size for re-entries. The advantage of this approach would be that you should squeeze more money from the price movement, the disadvantage would be that you could miss the re-entry altogether (without chasing) if your exit was premature. Maybe that is the reason why you keep some contracts in?

So what is your opinion on this all in / all out approach as compared to your scaling out? Have you tested it during your trade management development? Are there any other disadvantages which I don't see?

[MidKnight 12]

Hi head2k,

 

In the absence of Atto, I would say that I have tried what you are saying. It sounds great in theory but the problem is that in hindsight it works great but in RT, not so great for me. This is because markets are probabilistic and when its an all or nothing approach, I have now reduced any ability to make money from being wrong, which of course is a possibility when dealing with markets.

 

With kind regards,

MK

[Head2k 10]

Hi head2k,

 

In the absence of Atto, I would say that I have tried what you are saying. It sounds great in theory but the problem is that in hindsight it works great but in RT, not so great for me. This is because markets are probabilistic and when its an all or nothing approach, I have now reduced any ability to make money from being wrong, which of course is a possibility when dealing with markets.

 

With kind regards,

MK

Thanks for your input. I guess it would need a sophisticated approach and change in psychology or perception of the trade. To implement this strategy I would need to consider this sequence of exiting and re-entering as one trade (that would be important psychologically) and manage stops just like if I was scaling out and trailing stops for remaining contracts. This is not the first time I got this idea, but kind of wondered why scaling out is common and this is not. I somewhat feel that this approach could be more emotionally exhausting, and then one is unable to use it effectively.

[atto 20]

Well, you certainly could trade that way, and it may be even more profitable. However, my exits don't perfectly capture moves, and a climax (or as some say, climactic action) doesn't always signify the end of a move. I scale out on climactic action because that shows new counter-trend buying/selling interest, but that doesn't mean the new interest will be able to do anything. Thus, I do still want market exposure from my last entry (or market bias). On trend moves, my goal is to re-enter at a better price than my exit.

 

Hope that helps answer your question.

[BlowFish 10]

1. I am in the learning process so you will have to excuse me. You say that the climatic action has to be tested but I have seen a number of times price spike on high vol and then test that level on low vol, but the trend does not just reverse

 

2. would you care to expand on what is meant by developing a sensitivity for climatic action

 

3. lack of sellers and lack of buyers I thought were price moves to test selling climax and buying climax respectively, are you saying that a trader should enter immediately on this and not wait for any confirmation, afterall if it is a valid test, surely the ideal point of entry may have gone, but there should be enough momentum for further move, so how can the trade be over.

 

please excuse if I show lack of knowledge on Wyckoff but what I have read is very logical and would like to learn more from experienced Wyckoff operators.

 

These are good questions and I'd also be interested in experienced Wycoffians views. You could also add how do you distinguish a preliminary climax from a 'real' trend stopping one? I guess this is where you have to deliver a "sensitivity for climatic action"?

[BlowFish 10]

There is a chart to what I said. You have a successful test but buyers are reluctant then, which leads to retest. If you bought the first test maybe you would like to get out when you notice the action marked with the two arrows. Or elsewhere, it is up to you.

And still keep in mind that I am a beginner and these are just general annotations I made right now, looking at Friday afternoon NQ action with hindsight.

 

A couple of questions if I may. Your last comment at the right of the chart. What lead you to expect an upside breakout? (i.e. 'accumulation' had finished and that a further test was not required) Wsa it the fact that there had been a couple of tests already?

 

What differentiated the first test from the second? (it looked to me as if it might have had more selling interest, certainly seemed no less). This was part of Hakunas question 1.

 

Thanks for sharing the chart btw:)

[Head2k 10]

A couple of questions if I may. Your last comment at the right of the chart. What lead you to expect an upside breakout? (i.e. 'accumulation' had finished and that a further test was not required) Wsa it the fact that there had been a couple of tests already?

 

What differentiated the first test from the second? (it looked to me as if it might have had more selling interest, certainly seemed no less). This was part of Hakunas question 1.

 

Thanks for sharing the chart btw:)

To the expectancy of upside breakout: Just my observation that if price stops under resistance but fails to bounce back and forms a narrow range instead, the breakout is quite likely. But I haven't done any research on that. However, even Vadym Graifer mentions this phenomenon in his book (not that breakout was likely or not, but he actually has a setup where he would buy such a breakout).

 

To the difference between test: Not sure, maybe nothing significant? I guess there doesn't need to be any difference. And I guess that it doesn't matter if volume on the second test is slightly higher than on the first one. It is just a matter of the moment when one side realizes that the other side gave up.

However, if you look closely, the second test is W, so contains two test, actually. And on the second trough volume is really very low, showing that those who wanted to sold there are pretty much done.

[Bearbull 10]

1. I am in the learning process so you will have to excuse me. You say that the climatic action has to be tested but I have seen a number of times price spike on high vol and then test that level on low vol, but the trend does not just reverse

 

2. would you care to expand on what is meant by developing a sensitivity for climatic action

 

3. lack of sellers and lack of buyers I thought were price moves to test selling climax and buying climax respectively, are you saying that a trader should enter immediately on this and not wait for any confirmation, afterall if it is a valid test, surely the ideal point of entry may have gone, but there should be enough momentum for further move, so how can the trade be over.

 

please excuse if I show lack of knowledge on Wyckoff but what I have read is very logical and would like to learn more from experienced Wyckoff operators.

 

Glad to know you are prepared to learn, Zeon had similar issues sometimeback and we addressed that: have a look at some of the threads in the Wyckoff forum including:

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/131/riding-the-wyckoff-wave-3739-33.html

I don't want to attach all the charts but here is the content of my post there: Once again understand your frustration which actually stems from the fact that the market is not behaving as per your expectation based upon a pattern or an indicator be it VSA or a price based derivative. or S/R or

Trendline.

 

1. If you reflect on this with an open mind, the message is loud and clear, the price is going to do what it is going to do. It cannot be dictated just because something on our chart(RSI, CCI divergence, head and shoulder, VSA no demand and upthrust, moving average crossover, doji, engulfing bar etc) tells us that the market should go up or down.

 

2. For any indicator or pattern , there will always be two identical examples , one which panned out and other did not. This has to do with the inherent uncertainty and probability of outcome in the market. It is logical to ask why did demand or supply emerge at a particular location but illogical to expect it to emerge there just because the indicator or the pattern on my chart says so. It is like shouting out: what right the buyers or sellers had to come out at this price and time. and take the prices in the wrong direction

 

3. If you study Wyckoff's analysis (believe the pdf file is on this thread) of a year's price action, you will consistently note how he is detached from the outcome, the entry is taken based upon his reading of price/vol, then he looks for ongoing signals which will confirm, or contradict his trade or force him to modify as the trade is managed.

 

4. It is going to take a while to reach this stage of detachment where one approaches the market without fear or anxiety and allow the market to dictate your action. Hence the need for the exercise with 15min charts etc which I suggested. It is not a question of singing anybody's tune, I have gone through the same stages and finally it dawned that the answer is not out there but in the charts themselves. It will put you in the driving seat, in control, not of the market but how you manoeuvre, if there is a diversion, you follow that path without resisting, think Db posted an excellent analogy of being a passenger on a bus somewhere, worth looking it up.

 

5. You mentioned the 2 identical chart patterns, actually you are looking at different time frames, 5min and 1min, and that is why I directed you to look at both the setups on 5min, so the answer was there. We are all looking at the same price action, as you say what is in front, but interpretation is based entirely on what we have been taught/observed and what we believe and expect. Surely you can appreciate that.

 

Anyway I will make another attempt via the attached:

 

1. NQ 5min (a) 2 arrows showing climatic vol, this has been the ongoing problem for the past 6years with VSA tutoring, and has been ingrained in many mindsets, wait for a no demand, upthrust, short and vice versa.

 

In the chart the first trendline (black) is broken following just such a no demand and yes you could have shorted but then prices find support at 1970 , here the bars are narrow with low vol, then the market reacts up once again with low vol, NQ 5min (b), if there was supply, how could the prices go up on low vol, the demand must be of good quality, hence this was absorption . Hence you have to modify your stance and go with the flow of the market.

 

 

2. Once the prices rise above the swing high, the second trendline (blue) can be inserted. and price action read in a similar manner. (NQ 5min © (d)),

prices rise after retracement on low vol, why? there is no supply in this instance, but yes there will be cases when it encounters resistance and prices will plummet, and VSA team will point out that as no demand , their

ideal setup.

 

3. Now we move on the next day 7th May, the short around 2000 which has led to all this controversy. NQ 5min (e), again the black trendline is from previous day, you can take the previous days low and draw a new trendline (blue) after the prices break the previous day's high.

And again a new trendline on the day (brown). Now compare the price action and the bar ranges once this trendline is broken to that observed around 1990, zoom into 2min or 1min and study, am sure you will find it a revealing and rewarding exercise.

 

You will also find further info. on Db blog and http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f131/the-nature-of-support-and-resistance-3878.html plus it will worthwhile obtained Db's e-book on the subject, it is not expensive and highly informative and educational, guarantee you will be well pleased with the content.

Hope this helps.

[Bearbull 10]

These are good questions and I'd also be interested in experienced Wycoffians views. You could also add how do you distinguish a preliminary climax from a 'real' trend stopping one? I guess this is where you have to deliver a "sensitivity for climatic action"?

 

Think all this is elaborated upon in the threads mentioned in the previous post. W was very much interested in what price and volume did against trendlines, relevant support/resistance etc and Db has posted numerous charts to illustrate this including trendchannels. Vol considerations are largely irrelevant between significant support and resistance, focussing on where it matters will free the trader from engaging in bar by bar analysis as advocated by your friend,and professional trader and ...... expert;)

[BlowFish 10]

To the expectancy of upside breakout: Just my observation that if price stops under resistance but fails to bounce back and forms a narrow range instead, the breakout is quite likely. But I haven't done any research on that. However, even Vadym Graifer mentions this phenomenon in his book (not that breakout was likely or not, but he actually has a setup where he would buy such a breakout).

 

To the difference between test: Not sure, maybe nothing significant? I guess there doesn't need to be any difference. And I guess that it doesn't matter if volume on the second test is slightly higher than on the first one. It is just a matter of the moment when one side realizes that the other side gave up.

However, if you look closely, the second test is W, so contains two test, actually. And on the second trough volume is really very low, showing that those who wanted to sold there are pretty much done.

 

OK, but price was not at resistance it was at support in fact it had just stopped virtually sitting on support it could barely manage a bounce before going 'boxy'. It was also well under the previous ellipse. I am not a 'hard right edge' facist but you have to be particularly careful annotating when you have the benefit of knowing the outcome. I wonder if that was your thoughts at the time? This is only a 1 minute chart (which is simply a trigger chart for me) so hard to know the context (had we just had a 50 point drop) based on that alone, I would have bet (wrongly) on resumption down.

 

As for the test that was kind of the point of Hakunas question how do you know if a test is successful without waiting for the outcome Perhaps the short answer is you don't? If price rises with good interest it was successful if it falls it failed.

 

Now the Wycoff 'model' gives a pretty plausible framework to anticipate what might happen and to monitor what is happening that in itself can be valuable. However it seems to me that more often than not climactic action is not a climax and that tests fail as often as they are successful.

 

I hope you don't mind me being devils advocate I think the answer lies in this 'sensitivity' that DB talks about. Seems a tough thing to quantify but certainly worth having a a go. I am not sure its something you can see on static charts to be honest hehe perhaps thats why I got that breakout wrong (good excuse eh!)

[DbPhoenix 42]

As for the test that was kind of the point of Hakunas question how do you know if a test is successful without waiting for the outcome Perhaps the short answer is you don't? If price rises with good interest it was successful if it falls it failed.

 

Now the Wycoff 'model' gives a pretty plausible framework to anticipate what might happen and to monitor what is happening that in itself can be valuable. However it seems to me that more often than not climactic action is not a climax and that tests fail as often as they are successful.

 

One can't know if the climax is going to be a "real climax" or not in real time. That's the difference between genuine real-time trading and hindsight trading, particular the Find The Bar-type hindsight trading. If you want to take what you think is a climax, then take it. If the test fails, you're out at breakeven or with a small loss. If the test succeeds, you're still in. If you prefer to wait for the test, then wait for a successful test and take that. If there is no successful test and price continues to fall, then you haven't taken a trade.

 

That's all there is to it.

 

In order to determine whether or not a setup is high probability, one has to test it. But few people want to do that. Too much time and trouble and effort. They'd rather jump into the planning stage. But developing a plan without doing any testing on any of the setups contained in the plan is largely a waste of time.

 

Wyckoff is not mechanical. It isn't contained in a software program. It isn't about bars and indicators and ice and creeks. It's about price movement and the ebb and flow of buying pressure and selling pressure. One develops an understanding of it by watching price move, not by reading about price moving or by studying static charts. If one is unable to understand the nature of support and resistance or trend or the auction market, then this is not for him. But that doesn't mean that it doesn't "work". It means only that he needs to look elsewhere.

Edited September 9, 2015 by DbPhoenix

[Head2k 10]

OK, but price was not at resistance it was at support in fact it had just stopped virtually sitting on support it could barely manage a bounce before going 'boxy'. It was also well under the previous ellipse. I am not a 'hard right edge' facist but you have to be particularly careful annotating when you have the benefit of knowing the outcome. I wonder if that was your thoughts at the time? This is only a 1 minute chart (which is simply a trigger chart for me) so hard to know the context (had we just had a 50 point drop) based on that alone, I would have bet (wrongly) on resumption down.

I was not watching NQ on Friday, so I had no thoughts about it in real time. If I look at the chart now I have a bulish outlook seeing that narrow range, but if I were in a long trade I would definitely tighten my stop under lows of it. Because this range seems to me a bit like an apex forming. But you are right that it is hard to say if I could see this in real time, too, so I will be more careful next time when annotating with hindsight. Thank you for notice.

[DbPhoenix 42]

I was not watching NQ on Friday, so I had no thoughts about it in real time. If I look at the chart now I have a bulish outlook seeing that narrow range, but if I were in a long trade I would definitely tighten my stop under lows of it. Because this range seems to me a bit like an apex forming. But you are right that it is hard to say if I could see this in real time, too, so I will be more careful next time when annotating with hindsight. Thank you for notice.

 

No need to be careful about annotating in hindsight if you have good reasons for making the annotations. Otherwise, there's no point in posting hindsight charts at all.

 

Regardless of the context, you noted the climactic action and the character of the subsequent swing low. This provided potential support. This level was tested twice. When price rose after the last test and traded sideways, it did so above what had been established for the time being as support and below the resistance that had been established between 1510 and 1520 (more or less). The only selling interest of note was the first test of 1255, at about 1535. The fact that it continues to bounce between 1256 and 1260, with very little trading activity, should alert you to the possibility/probability that you're looking at a springboard, whether you're doing it in real time or not. Acknowledging that you might be incorrect and that you should place your stop below this potential springboard is just the sort of thing you should be doing in real time.

 

Therefore, again, there's no need to beat yourself up over the annotations as long as you have defensible reasons for having made them.

Edited November 10, 2008 by DbPhoenix

[jonbig04 10]

In order to determine whether or not a setup is high probability, one has to test it. But few people want to do that. Too much time and trouble and effort. They'd rather jump into the planning stage. But developing a plan without doing any testing on any of the setups contained in the plan is largely a waste of time.

 

 

 

 

This may be a little off topic, but a great way to test out a strategy, I think, is to use the replay function. When you're looking at a chart its very difficult to replicate what you see when the rest of the chart isn't there. Plus you can rewind or fast forward replay, or just sit there and watch it in normal time. It can be useful for testing or just getting more screen time. Just an observation.

[Bearbull 10]

Thank you for this explanation, find this confusing, Dbphoenix says to wait for confirmation then the trade is gone, but then from what you explain, that is what has to be done.

Perhaps Dbphoenix or yourself would take trouble to show it up on charts, once again I apologise as am not advanced enough to see it in my mind. without looking at charts.

 

Here are a couple of charts to illustrate the point ie. to pay more attention to price vol at relevant support and resistance, them employ trendlines to stay in the trend.

 

The first is a 5min Dax, the second is a close of the past few hours on 1min, you can zoom into 10sec or 5sec if you wish to , to note any volume divergence i.e tests. Have shown a test on low vol on 1min after the buying climatic action against resistance.

For further details on how to employ trendlines etc both for entry and exit/scaleouts (to keep to the subject matter of this thread) study the posts on the links provided earlier and in Db blog plus e-book.

Hope this helps

[Bearbull 10]

And this is the latest just to show that even after a successful test on low vol (2nd red arrow) the trade does not always work out, however the market goes down for further test of the support(3rd arrow) on even higher vol, but turn up on increased vol. Buying pressure greater than selling pressure. But after having been stopped out on the first trade hopefully at breakeven, have to be available as Mark Douglas states in Trading in the Zone for the next opportunity.

[BlowFish 10]

DB thank you for indulging me Really I mean that sincerely. Also I do apologise if I have de-railed Atto's excellent thread. Imho potential 'answers' lie in what Atto is presenting here. In a nutshell 'analysis' only gets you so far, how you manage a trade in response to what you are seeing is every bit (or more) important. Having said that I do think the whole idea of 'sensitivity' to what is happening is a pretty big deal, (as an aside anyone ever read the intuitive trader) I guess it is in my nature to want to try quantify it. I have done a lot of work trying to do so. I have lots of 'rules of thumb' <shrug>.

 

Last couple of weeks I traded the USD/JPY and sorely missed volume information. Having said that I have done as well as on indexes (probablly better). One can see changes of 'pace' very well in real time. I think it is possibly more pronounced. How do you quantify pace in real-time? perhaps I should give up and go with the flow.

 

Anyway Atto great stuff you are doing here beautifully clear charts and concise commentary. If you are up to it I'd love to see one with the whole scale in + scale out. I promise I wont dilute the thread anymore

[DbPhoenix 42]

DB thank you for indulging me Really I mean that sincerely. Also I do apologise if I have de-railed Atto's excellent thread. Imho potential 'answers' lie in what Atto is presenting here. In a nutshell 'analysis' only gets you so far, how you manage a trade in response to what you are seeing is every bit (or more) important. Having said that I do think the whole idea of 'sensitivity' to what is happening is a pretty big deal, (as an aside anyone ever read the intuitive trader) I guess it is in my nature to want to try quantify it. I have done a lot of work trying to do so. I have lots of 'rules of thumb' <shrug>.

 

Last couple of weeks I traded the USD/JPY and sorely missed volume information. Having said that I have done as well as on indexes (probablly better). One can see changes of 'pace' very well in real time. I think it is possibly more pronounced. How do you quantify pace in real-time? perhaps I should give up and go with the flow.

 

Anyway Atto great stuff you are doing here beautifully clear charts and concise commentary. If you are up to it I'd love to see one with the whole scale in + scale out. I promise I wont dilute the thread anymore

 

One could study hundreds of charts that, for example, address scaling in and scaling out in excruciating detail yet still be unable to manage a trade in this way in real time. In order to accomplish such a task, one must understand at least price movement, the relationship between price and volume, the nature of support and resistance, and trend. This is accomplished by spending many hours in front of a screen watching price move. If one doesn't want to do that, then something involving indicators might be right up his alley.

Edited December 5, 2008 by DbPhoenix

[HAKUNA 10]

Appreciate your effort and the charts, I now have something visual to go bye, big thank you. Sorry for the trouble.

[atto 20]

I do have to agree with Db's thoughts on this one. My goal for this thread was to discuss Wyckoff-based methods for exiting and scaling out trades. This is only a facet of Wyckoff understanding: how markets move, what drives markets, and how we can profit from this. Wyckoff teachings extend significantly past this, but this is an important area of understanding leading to profitability. Largely, I think it's been very successful so far, and I thank all contributors.

 

I don't personally mind posting complete trades, but I'm not convinced it will help as much as you may think. An example of this might come from anything challenging you've learned before. Two things come to mind for myself: programming and higher level math. Years ago, I could see code, completely understand it, but not be able to produce it myself. This is the same for seeing examples, thinking "oh, that makes sense", and not being able to act on that thought in real time, under different conditions. Additionally, remember, any trades I produce would be from my specific trading plan and setups, which do not necessarily encompass Wyckoff concepts as a whole.

 

The single greatest way to be able to identify climactic action real time (and actually, to start to understand price action) is to watch price action. If time is an issue, record the day, and replay it at a faster speed (and slow it back down when you think the market's at an important place). This is the absolute least mechanical part of the Wyckoff approach.

[erierambler 10]

I notice the topic of upthrusts has not been mentioned. Does Wyckoff place any importance on upthrusts itself or does he mainly look to the follow through/ no follow through?

erie

[BlowFish 10]

You are neither derailing nor diluting the thread. However, you ask questions that cannot and should not be answered here.

 

Without wanting to be pedantic 'twas not I that asked I just highlighted them. (though I am interested in sensitivity) The same questions crop up time and again, people clearly have difficulty in this area. (they naturally lead to another set of questions If the individual peruses things further I would bet they will follow shortly)

 

You say that you have done a lot of work trying to quantify this, but given the number of years that you have been circling this material, perhaps you should either depart from your efforts at quantification or devote yourself to something more appropriate to those efforts, such as VSA.

 

Ooo thats a low blow (about VSA) :boxing: coming from a high priest of Wycoff I recall messing around with 1 tick range charts with volume that you subsequently re posted to illustrate an answer to a question you where fielding. It was around that time that you became an advocate of the 10 second chart, perhaps all my efforts are not completely wasted?

 

 

One could study hundreds of charts that, for example, address scaling in and scaling out in excruciating detail yet still be unable to manage a trade in this way in reat time. In order to accomplish such a task, one must understand at least price movement, the relationship between price and volume, the nature of support and resistance, and trend. This is accomplished by spending many hours in front of a screen watching price move. If one doesn't want to do that, then something involving indicators might be right up his alley.

 

Absolutely, quoted for truth. it could be argued that volume is not absolutely vital. As I mentioned previously I seem to be doing pretty well with USD/JPY though I certainly miss the volume information.

 

It took me many many hours (you might have noticed I like to question things hehe) but when you get it, it's so simple. I can't help wondering does it really need as long as most spend to learn to draw lines that have contained price in the past and then take a trade if price bounces off (or breaks out) of them? It really is simple. I still sometimes change stuff around like entering in anticipation of the bounce or on the re-bounce or different size bounces. It all 'works' it's largely just preference.

 

On the subject of indicators I try one every now and then (market delta seemed to have promise but ended up looking like just any other squiggly line to me) I have noticed that my hand drawn lines on JPY often coincide with fib levels, I found it kind of amusing that somewhere, someone, is selling yards (slang for a billion units) of yen off fib levels.

 

Assuming that people have learnt how to recognise an egg (the highlighted passage above is the egg) its time to get cracking (terrible pun) and talk recipes and make omelettes. This is why (I think) this is a great thread it dosen't just talk about eggs it talks about how one might use a recipe to make an omelette.

 

Anyway I enjoyed your recipe Atto more interesting (to me) than another analysis of eggs!

[BlowFish 10]

 

Two things come to mind for myself: programming and higher level math. Years ago, I could see code, completely understand it, but not be able to produce it myself. This is the same for seeing examples, thinking "oh, that makes sense", and not being able to act on that thought in real time, under different conditions. Additionally, remember, any trades I produce would be from my specific trading plan and setups, which do not necessarily encompass Wyckoff concepts as a whole.

 

 

When god was a boy, I used to write code. I was pretty good at hacking something quick and dirty together. I got things done, usually PDQ. Over that particular career I came across one or two people that not only wrote beautiful, elegant code, they would often accomplish things even quicker than me! Of course I paid particular attention to their methods and over time picked up little tricks and techniques they used. My code was still quick but far less dirty.

 

Its a great thread don't let me sway you from the path!