Jump to content

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.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Recommended Posts

  gucci said:
Points 2 and 3 form in a very specific way. Would you elaborate on what exactly you had in mind?

 

Volume leads Price, so spend some time looking at Volume.

 

Note the Order of Events.

 

How does Price (by Virtue of Volume) move between Points One and Two?

 

How does Price (by Virtue of Volume) move between Points Two and Three?

 

How does Price (by virtue of Volume) move from Point Three to an FTT?

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:
Volume leads Price, so spend some time looking at Volume.

 

Note the Order of Events.

 

How does Price (by Virtue of Volume) move between Points One and Two?

 

How does Price (by Virtue of Volume) move between Points Two and Three?

 

How does Price (by virtue of Volume) move from Point Three to an FTT?

 

HTH.

 

 

- Spydertrader

 

 

Thanks. Actually I was rather thinking along the lines of smaller fractals or intrabar Price and Volume actions at those points. Is it unnecessary ? Does encreasing and decreasing Volume, Pace etc. suffice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  gucci said:
Thanks. Actually I was rather thinking along the lines of smaller fractals or intrabar Price and Volume actions at those points. Is it unnecessary ? Does encreasing and decreasing Volume, Pace etc. suffice?

 

You may want to review the definition of the word - fractal.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a question for those who are using YM for their MADA. Is it possible for YM to go from P2 to P3 of an up container, while the ES is going from P3 to the FTT of the down container, and visa versa.?

 

E.g., today's 1400 on the ES was inside the lateral (it closed outside, but the next bar closed back inside the 1345 lateral) and seemed like P2 of the accel down container. At the same time, YM seemed to complete the down sequence on 1400 bar, which looked like P1 of the new up container.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  romanus said:
I got a question for those who are using YM for their MADA. Is it possible for YM to go from P2 to P3 of an up container, while the ES is going from P3 to the FTT of the down container, and visa versa.?

 

No.

 

Currently, I do not use the YM as part of my M-A-D-A (nor STR-SQU, Tic Charts nor DOM). While in the past, I used the entire arsenal of medium and fine tools, today, I no longer have a desire to work that hard. As such, I now only use the ES.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:
No.

 

Currently, I do not use the YM as part of my M-A-D-A (nor STR-SQU, Tic Charts nor DOM). While in the past, I used the entire arsenal of medium and fine tools, today, I no longer have a desire to work that hard. As such, I now only use the ES.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

I took the DOM, str-sqz- tic chart and YM all off my screen for a year now. Just have ES 5 minute. It has been the best thing for me personally. I do keep a monthly and daily chart to reference the bigger picture occasionally that are on a tab hidden until needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:
You may want to review the definition of the word - fractal.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Sorry for my sloppiness. You are right, my question in the posted form suggests my ignorance with respect to the meaning of the word fractal. I hope this doesn't represent the state of affairs in reality. (actually I'm quite sure this is not the case :cool:). I hope my inquiring can somehow be made more comprehensible by the following.

When price has finished its movement from pont 1 to point 2 (provided those points were correctly identified by a trader) and starts heading towards point 3, one can easily pinpoint a Price Bar and a corresponding Volume Bar which signify the completion of the formation of point 2. (One of the extremes of this Price Bar sets the volatility of the channel and touches the LTL.) One can then zoom in into this Price Bar (5 min Bar represented by five 1 min Bars for example) in order to understand how exactly it was forming. While I do not suggest to dig deeper down the rabbit hole and split each Price Bar at points 2 and 3, I was wondering whether the differences you were talking about have anything to do with the Price and Volume actions at those points (aka Bars,aka fractals) and not only with the behavior of the market between them?

 

Sorry for the lengthy post and thank you for your support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  gucci said:
I was wondering whether the differences you were talking about have anything to do with the Price and Volume actions at those points (aka Bars,aka fractals) and not only with the behavior of the market between them?

 

When you discuss the differences between one minute and five minute bars, you aren't speaking fractally. You are talking timeframe. When objects represent a 'fractal' nature, these objects contain "a mathematically generated pattern that is reproducible at any magnification or reduction" where all attributes remain the same irrespective of scale.

 

As such, (Since you've articulated that your understanding of 'fractal' isn't at issue) I don't understand why you have posed the question - as each and every fractal (by definition) exists in the same fashion as the ones faster (or slower) than it. However, the answer to your question is: No.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:
When you discuss the differences between one minute and five minute bars, you aren't speaking fractally. You are talking timeframe. When objects represent a 'fractal' nature, these objects contain "a mathematically generated pattern that is reproducible at any magnification or reduction" where all attributes remain the same irrespective of scale.

 

I still can not see the difference. I think this is very important to understand, so bear with me. The fractal nature of the market should suggest that every Price Bar on every timeframe represent a fractal. I mean 15min Bar, 5min Bar, 1hour Bar and so on. When our channel contains six 5min Bars for an example, it represents simply one 30min Bar. How else can you "magnify" or "reduce" the market? Could you elaborate? TIA.

 

 

 

  Spydertrader said:
As such, (Since you've articulated that your understanding of 'fractal' isn't at issue) I don't understand why you have posed the question - as each and every fractal (by definition) exists in the same fashion as the ones faster (or slower) than it. However, the answer to your question is: No.

 

- Spydertrader

 

We've learnt a number of various SOC. So I just thought, that points 2 and 3 may represent important contexts for different SOC on a faster timeframe to materialize,hence the question. But it isn't important now anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  gucci said:
I still can not see the difference. I think this is very important to understand, so bear with me. The fractal nature of the market should suggest that every Price Bar on every timeframe represent a fractal. I mean 15min Bar, 5min Bar, 1hour Bar and so on. When our channel contains six 5min Bars for an example, it represents simply one 30min Bar. How else can you "magnify" or "reduce" the market? ...
If I may ... Price waveform has a fractal nature, and exists out there, whether you open your charting program or not. To look at that waveform you choose a time frame, a resolution, for your chart. Your 1, 5 or 15 min bars represent that resolution, that gives you the possibility to see a subset of those price fractals. It's like you measure an object's dimensions using a ruler. Your ruler may be marked in whatever units (inches, centimeters, whatever), independent of that object's shape. Obviously, you need to appropriately choose a ruler that allows you to measure whatever you want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  cnms2 said:
If I may ... Price waveform has a fractal nature, and exists out there, whether you open your charting program or not. To look at that waveform you choose a time frame, a resolution, for your chart. Your 1, 5 or 15 min bars represent that resolution, that gives you the possibility to see a subset of those price fractals. It's like you measure an object's dimensions using a ruler. Your ruler may be marked in whatever units (inches, centimeters, whatever), independent of that object's shape. Obviously, you need to appropriately choose a ruler that allows you to measure whatever you want to.

 

Let me clarify my confusion (or ignorance) by comparing the fractal nature of the market to a fractal nature of a snowflake. Snowflake has a certain pattern whether you look at it or not. If you take just a part of a snowflake and enlarge it, this enlarged part will exhibit the same pattern which the whole snowflake showed. You take just a tiny spot on a snowflake and use a microscope to discern the pattern, the result will be the same - you'll see the same pattern. Now the snowflake has a static nature,whereas the market has a dynamic one. So instead of a microscope you'll need different (faster) timeframes to behold the cycles of the price movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:
No.

 

Thank your for the answer.

 

  Spydertrader said:

Currently, I do not use the YM as part of my M-A-D-A (nor STR-SQU, Tic Charts nor DOM). While in the past, I used the entire arsenal of medium and fine tools, today, I no longer have a desire to work that hard. As such, I now only use the ES.

As it relates to my own personal pursuit of understanding, I stopped looking at YM quite some time ago. However after your recent suggestion to look at YM within the specific context of the lateral discussion for one specific purpose (WWT inside the lateral), I started thinking that perhaps occasionally (as in very rare), the YM could possibly provide me with the answer where I can't seem to find the answer on ES itself.

 

An example of what I mean is the ES sequence in the attached. Even after the market built the sequence in an opposite direction, I am still unable to determine the correct annotations (A or B in the attached). After looking at YM, in my own personally subjective opinion, the scenario A on ES seems to be highly unlikely.

 

The above was a long background for the actual question that I wanted clarify -- would I be correct in stating that points 1, 2 and 3 on ES correspond to those same points on YM building the same sequence on 2 min bars?

 

Thank you for any light that you can shed on the subject.

5aa70fc7de9e1_ES03-101_21_2010.thumb.PNG.474495ac81d6c8cfaf4f4202939e1204.PNG

5aa70fc7e830a_YM03-101_21_2010.thumb.png.46531b0a0184352ccddaf8f92ae81a53.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  gucci said:
Let me clarify my confusion (or ignorance) by comparing the fractal nature of the market to a fractal nature of a snowflake. Snowflake has a certain pattern whether you look at it or not. If you take just a part of a snowflake and enlarge it, this enlarged part will exhibit the same pattern which the whole snowflake showed. You take just a tiny spot on a snowflake and use a microscope to discern the pattern, the result will be the same - you'll see the same pattern. Now the snowflake has a static nature,whereas the market has a dynamic one. So instead of a microscope you'll need different (faster) timeframes to behold the cycles of the price movement.
The 1, 5, 15 bar chart is like your microscope's set resolution, and cannot be referred as the market's / snowflake's fractal. You can't say "5 min fractal of the market", as you can't say "x10 fractal of the snowflake". You can talk about the price or snowflake fractals you can see through your chart or microscope chosen resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  gucci said:
Let me clarify my confusion (or ignorance) by comparing the fractal nature of the market to a fractal nature of a snowflake.
The objects in price pane exhibit self-similarity but lack the fractal dimension and as such can not represent fractals in mathematical sense using the definition (1.Self-similarity + 2. Fractional dimension + 3. Formation by iteration). Correct annotations in volume pane (which are abstracted from both price and volume bars), however, meet all necessary and sufficient conditions of being "fractal" in mathematical sense. Correct annotations in volume pane require an ability to interpret the context which involves among other things the ability to differentiate, and some other abilities (which currently elude me, both in a sense of lacking the ability itself as well as in a sense of being unable to define which specific ability is lacking:rofl:).

This is just my own personal theory, which could be wrong.

P.S. Everything in italics was meant as an attempt to be humorous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  gucci said:
I still can not see the difference.

 

I (quite often) encourage people finding themselves thwarted by an obstacle to look at the problem in question from a different point of view - other than from the standpoint upon which they currently base their observations.

 

  gucci said:
How else can you "magnify" or "reduce" the market?

 

Tape, Traverse, Channel

 

  gucci said:
We've learnt a number of various SOC. So I just thought, that points 2 and 3 may represent important contexts for different SOC on a faster timeframe to materialize,hence the question.

 

Signals of change matter only at the completion of the trader specific fractal Order of Events.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  romanus said:
would I be correct in stating that points 1, 2 and 3 on ES correspond to those same points on YM building the same sequence on 2 min bars?

 

You have accurately differentiated between Option 'A' and Option 'B' in terms of 'correctness.'

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  cnms2 said:
Price waveform has a fractal nature, and exists out there, whether you open your charting program or not.

 

Which is why Price Bars no more make a trend, than standing in one's garage makes one a car. Standing in a garage might allow a person to 'see' a car - just as looking at a chart might allow a trader to 'see' the trends.

 

- Spydertrder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  romanus said:
I stopped looking at YM quite some time ago.

 

In 1957, The YM didn't exist. In 1957, the ES did not exist. In 1957, Intra-DAY data did not exist. However, one could obtain information about the day's events from a newspaper at the end of a day - while sitting in a diner eating a plate of eggs.

 

If (out of al the various markets around the world) I randomly picked a chart and (while removing the Title, Time and Price levels from the axis) asked you to tell me what market did the chart represent? and what time frame does the chart show?

 

Could you tell me the answers? Could anyone?

 

More importantly, does it matter? Of course it doesn't matter which market or which time frame the chart represents.

 

Any market. Any Timeframe - provided sufficient liquidity exists, right?

 

Now, (after removing the items listed above) what do we have left? Price and Volume.

 

These matter. Everything else becomes a matter of efficiency and effectiveness (making more money per unit time). However, until we can always see that which exists, we must avoid any temptation to (consciously or unwittingly) focus on efficiency and effectiveness.

 

In 1957, someone discovered they had the ability to understand the language of all markets. We all now have way more tools at our disposal than to anyone in 1957. Make sure these tools don't obscure that which can be seen by a patron at a diner eating eggs while reading the daily newspaper.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is regarding #1254, which we discussed a lateral that is itself a SOC.

 

The lateral that starts on Feb 5 10:45 I believe is an example of something similar. (this one is actually a non- Lateral Drill conforming lateral, but similar in the sense it is a SOC and pt 3 is the forming bar).

 

My chart for that day isn't finished yet but see attached.

 

edit: in my chart that should be decreasing black, not decreasing red (eg point 1 just formed and is starting to head up) of the tape at 10:10 - 10:15. Wasn't trying to show anything tricky, just a typo :)

5aa70fc94c3ca_feb_05_2010lateralsnipit1.thumb.PNG.a0e44f35dedbcde580cc956158e0e268.PNG

Edited by ptunic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be that, in the attached lateral, that at the first bar the previous sequence is complete, but that the actual signal of change happens no the third bar (the outside bar) inside the lateral?

 

--

innersky

5aa70fca875a3_lat2023120with20annotations20Jan20620201020chart20es1..thumb.jpg.76ced898689ef3fed0e86e30b4c4f11d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.