The Price / Volume Relationship

[ehorn 10]

Ehorn,

 

Why did you terminate the 11:00 lateral at 11:20 or was that just a software artifact?

 

Hey LJ,

 

As configured, NT trunks the LAT shadowing with one bar out. To me, it appeared to be a dominant lateral. I believe dominant laterals take us to PT2 of something (I have annotated it as PT2 of the final DOM tape). I see a few possible ways to annotate the past few days (read I am lacking certainty here) and so tomorrow I will WAIT for certainty.

 

A wise man once provided some great insight. When one is lacking certainty as to the accuracy of his/her annotations of the sequences, then the only correct decision/action is to WAIT.

 

WAIT until the market provides certainty for the trader.

[ljyoung 10]

.....

 

WAIT until the market provides certainty for the trader.

 

Am in complete agreement with this. Thanks for your explanation.

[innersky 10]

What I know about lateral formations

 

To start a lateral formation minimum 3 bars are required where bar 2 and 3 are contained within bar 1

 

It can be ended in several ways:

 

- 2 consecutive closes outside the lateral boundaries without forming a new formation with the exception when these 2 closes are flaws, then we need 3 bars outside the lateral

- an ibgs that pierces a boundary

- when a new lateral formation is created inside the lateral formation

 

There are 2 types of lateral formations that matter : those that start on or after pt2 (and before pt3) being non-dominant lateral formations

and those that start after pt3 being dominant lateral formations

 

Feel free to add missing things/make corrections

 

--

innersky

 

Correction, that ibgs bar must be on increasing volume in order to kill the lateral

 

--

innersky

[ljyoung 10]

Correction, that ibgs bar must be on increasing volume in order to kill the lateral

 

--

innersky

 

For the purposes of this discussion, I don't remember Spyder mentioning the IBGS effect, so, IMO, it may or may not be operative.

[innersky 10]

For the purposes of this discussion, I don't remember Spyder mentioning the IBGS effect, so, IMO, it may or may not be operative.

 

Actually, the answer does not lie with Spyder, but in the charts.

 

--

innersky

[ljyoung 10]

Actually, the answer does not lie with Spyder, but in the charts.

 

--

innersky

 

Thanks innersky. I needed that.

[ehorn 10]

My view of the day...

[rs5 10]

still struggling with tape gaussian. What kind of gaussian should be with the first lateral?

[Spydertrader 10]

Take a look at the attached Chart snip from today (08/04/2009) ...

 

What did the market form?

How do you know?

 

If you know neither answer ...

 

How many different ways can you annotate the chart snippet? Test to determine which of those ways represent the only correct method.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

[ehorn 10]

Take a look at the attached Chart snip from today (08/04/2009) ...

 

What did the market form?

How do you know?

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

A Tape...

Volume...

 

Yep! (small rudders)

 

 

I am a perennial "FFJ"... (Friggin' Fractal Jumper!) :doh:

 

Thanks Spyder

[romanus 10]

Take a look at the attached Chart snip from today (08/04/2009) ...

 

What did the market form?

How do you know?

 

It appears to me that the market formed a 5 min ES level Traverse, based on gaussians.

[cnms2 10]

I annotated it as a down channel: built of traverses built of tapes. Volume shows R2R2B2R at traverse level.

[Spydertrader 10]

Three Different Viewpoints ....

 

but only one represents the correct answer as provided by the market.

 

Remember, this isn't about how one 'views' the market, or how a trader 'interprets' the market, or even, about how one 'sees' the market (or any other gradient verbiage). This is about differentiating that which you believe you see, from that which, the market as actually provided.

 

Whatever a trader believes they see in the chart snippet, must also apply to every other thing on the same fractal. If the solution does not, then it cannot represent the correct answer.

 

Why something is correct or incorrect represents a far more important thing than simply obtaining the correct answer itself.

 

- Spydertrader

[rs5 10]

Option 1 - In a down traverse, does the sequence become r2r 2b 2r 2b 2r.....??

[rs5 10]

Option 2 - 2 traverse, but how to annotate gaussians??

[innersky 10]

Take a look at the attached Chart snip from today (08/04/2009) ...

 

What did the market form?

How do you know?

 

If you know neither answer ...

 

How many different ways can you annotate the chart snippet? Test to determine which of those ways represent the only correct method.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

 

When we look at the first R2R2B2R (13:00-14:00) we think down traverse. However, when price goes through its left trendline, it does so on decreasing volume. This means that we do not have a complete traverse. As such, 14:40 becomes the new pt3.

After our new pt3, we can see a R2R forming, meaning a new faster fractal is forming, that also has to complete. When this fractal finally completes, we can see that it forms an FTT.

At 15:50 price does go through the left trend line on increasing volume, and we have confirmation that the down traverse has completed, and an up traverse has started.

 

--

innersky

[FJK 10]

Take a look at the attached Chart snip from today (08/04/2009) ...

 

What did the market form?

How do you know?

 

 

My take. Mine is different from ehorns and romanus'.

 

Regarding the differences,

Spyder, have you changed something about the coloring functions in Trade Navigator since your PVTools? - my 1330 & 1335 bars are colored differently than yours. I assume we both use Genesis' datafeed..

 

If my non-dominant tape from the above period is wrongly annotated, I miss R2R2B2R in my pink lateral, hence it is invalid.

Edited August 5, 2009 by FJK
spelling...

[zak 10]

hi

 

non-dom down tape r2r2b2r R\

dom up tape b2b2r2b /B

non-dom down tape r2r2b(sub-skinny inside [OB tape])2r R\ for (a fanned) traverse P3

dom up tape b2b2r2b /B

[ehorn 10]

In the annotation drill snippet (across the first 9 bars) we go:

 

Stitch

FBP

OB

FTP

FBP

OB

 

What do we know about flaws?

 

@ 14:10 we begin moving up:

 

First bar DBV

Second Bar DBV

 

Is there something about tapes TO DV?

 

IBV does show up at 14:20...

 

How does it form?

 

 

If I review the sequences through here - I can only conclude one correct way to annotate this snippet which applies to every other thing on the same fractal.

[ljyoung 10]

Gotta go with romanus. Let's see.

[Spydertrader 10]

Spyder, have you changed something about the coloring functions in Trade Navigator since your PVTools?

 

Yes, but I have yet to completely code for all possible scenarios. Due to the limited capability of the Trade Navigator coding language ('TradeSense' doesn't currently allow for global / state variables or contain a 'looping' function), I only realize that the bar coloration code has missed a specific case scenario when I 'see' it form on the chart (When a specific example has no coding function, the current settings render the bar color blue instead of red or black). Once completed (hopefully, by the end of next quarter), I plan to make the changes available for free.

 

- Spydertrader

[Spydertrader 10]

Gotta go with romanus. Let's see.

 

Obtaining the correct (or incorrect) answer remains far less important as understanding why (or why not) a particular solution represents a true and accurate statement (or not).

 

- Spydertrader

[ehorn 10]

The market is very nice - it has told us this morning which way was the only correct way to annotate that snippet and so we can know WMCN

[ljyoung 10]

Obtaining the correct (or incorrect) answer remains far less important as understanding why (or why not) a particular solution represents a true and accurate statement (or not).

 

- Spydertrader

 

The reference to going with romanus was not pulled out of the ether. It was simply a statement of agreement with his logic. It had nothing to do with being right or wrong, good or bad, etc.

 

If the market shows his/my interpretation to be in error, then it simply means more work has to be done which, these days, typically involves correcting a fork error.

 

For me, the YM low at 6:54 finished the 'traverse' call. ES followed suit shortly thereafter.

 

It is very clear to me Spyder, that since June of 2006, you have been iterated countless times by the market. That the market will continue to do so to you and others is not surprising. Your help is greatly appreciated but there is likewise no doubt in my mind, that you have been helped by the contributions of everyone else studying the method.

 

So let's see. WMCN?

Edited August 5, 2009 by ljyoung
change of conjunction

[Gregor_S 10]

This is what I had at the EOD yesterday - a traverse down.

Edited August 5, 2009 by Gregor_S