The Price / Volume Relationship

[Spydertrader 10]

PS: to anyone, how can I get multiply quotes included from a post?

there is only the one, as above and the rest have not been displayed in the same way

 

If you wish t 'multiple quote' the same person (from the same post), simply copy the fist portion of the quoted text( in the example of me quoting you: [ qoute=zt379;105310 ], and then, paste it in front of the text you wish to quote. Also, include the "closed quote" box at the end of each quoted section.

 

HTH.

 

-Spydertrader

[zt379 10]

......................................................

Edited October 23, 2010 by zt379

[Breakeven 10]

Before I answer, why not extend your annotations (which began on the 13th) out until 10:30 AM (Eastern Time) on the 15th of October.

- Spydertrader

 

Concerning the Traverse (I am now certain of this...no really!) that ended at 10:30et the 15th.

 

I believe I can understand this area being a Traverse using the 2min YM. Not that I am adverse to using the YM for clarity but I want to avoid using it to cover a knowledge gap.

 

I am leaning toward the idea that this Traverse is knowable using only the 5min ES. Is this a reasonable conclusion?

 

TIA

[Spydertrader 10]

Concerning the Traverse (I am now certain of this...no really!) that ended at 10:30et the 15th.

 

Didn't we see a channel end on the 13th at 2:15 (Eastern Time)? What then must have ended at 10:30 on the 15th (based on what the market showed you after the 10:30 mark. (Eastern Time)

 

I am leaning toward the idea that this Traverse is knowable using only the 5min ES. Is this a reasonable conclusion?

 

Everything remains 'knowable' by using a single time frame chart (with equities, one uses a daily chart to see the same information we look to see on a five minute time frame). However, it may be the case that, sometimes, certain people need to use another tool to learn to see that which another finds perfecty clear - without using the additional tool.

 

Once someone can see that which once appeared obscure, the 'learning tool' is no longer required for learning or seeing.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Edit: Keep in mind the following: At one point in history, only one time frame existed - daily. Back then, one could not 'look to another tool' for answers. Today, you do have the ability to locate answers by using another tool, but that does not mean it is the only way to locate answers. Some just find it an easier way.

Edited October 23, 2010 by Spydertrader
clarification

[Breakeven 10]

Didn't we see a channel end on the 13th at 2:15 (Eastern Time)? What then must have ended at 10:30 on the 15th (based on what the market showed you after the 10:30 mark. (Eastern Time)

 

 

I think I jumped a fractal in trying to convey my meaning. In my last post I was focused only on the morning of the 15th but I did not make that clear. I did not mean to infer that everything up to the 15th was a Traverse.

 

My apologies, I should have attached this chart with the last post.

 

Thanks!

[patrader 10]

It seems that you decided that the nondominant gaussian color doesn't matter. Would you explain why does it make things easier for you?

 

"Your current 'view' of the market as transitioning from increasing to decreasing to increasing again (in terms of Volume) doesn't provide the most accurate interpretation. Instead, monitor from the standpoint of dominant to non-dominant and back to dominant again.

 

Use the Gaussians as an 'indicator' of dominance in order to have them 'match' the trend lines. On many of my charts, the non-dominant portion of the Gaussians do not have the same color as the Volume bars tracked. In other words, the Gaussian lines track dominant vs non-dominant Price Movement, rather than Volume bar coloration. The subtle difference often sits where one finds the market 'mode'.

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader"

 

A few portions of spydertrader's comments jumped out at me.First,NON-DOM GAUSSIANS many times DO NOT have the SAME COLOR as the volume bars tracked.Second,dom vs non-dom gaussian lines track PRICE MOVEMENT,rather that volume bar coloration.Third,use the gaussians as an "INDICATOR" of dominance.Hence the emphasis on dominant gaussians and less on non-dom gaussians as my "indicator" of market dominance.hth

[Spydertrader 10]

I think I jumped a fractal in trying to convey my meaning.

 

O.K. Now, if if you know something ended at 10:30 on the 15th, and that something represents the exact same something that ended on the 13th (at 2:15), then you also know what must come next with respect to the next thing (which begins at 10:30 on the 15th).

 

Have you annotated in the exact same fashion (based on context, pace and order of events) for each of these two areas?

 

Previous Chart

 

Newly posted revised chart snip.

 

Note the location differences in the medium weight pink line.

 

- Spydertrader

[Spydertrader 10]

Hence the emphasis on dominant gaussians and less on non-dom gaussians as my "indicator" of market dominance.hth

 

I did not intend to transfer a diminished emphasis on non-dominance, or non-dominant gaussian movement relative to dominance, or dominant gaussian movement. After all, one cannot arrive at Point Three without moving in a non-dominant direction.

 

Make sure you fully comprehend the information provided by the Gaussian Lines.

 

- Spydertrader

[patrader 10]

I did not intend to transfer a diminished emphasis on non-dominance, or non-dominant gaussian movement relative to dominance, or dominant gaussian movement. After all, one cannot arrive at Point Three without moving in a non-dominant direction.

 

Make sure you fully comprehend the information provided by the Gaussian Lines.

 

- Spydertrader

Originally Posted by cnms2 It seems that you decided that the nondominant gaussian color doesn't matter. Would you explain why does it make things easier for you?

 

Some time ago i discovered that my charting platform had a volume study that showed the volume bars as either lite gray for decreasing volume bars or dark gray for increasing volume bars(all in relation to the previous volume bar).I found it helpful to view this study for a while because it highlited the difference between peaks and troughs quite well.JHM is based on the order of events on fractals where the the peaks and troughs indicate dominant and non-dominant market behavior.I have found it easier to read the market sentiment and fractal nesting by showing dominant market direction with black or red color and non-dominant market direction with gray color.Since i usually trade only the dominant direction (unless volatility is unusually large) it helps with entries/exits and reversals.This also highlites where the market creates a decreasing volume bar after completion of the order of events like has shown in the jokari window(good example of that is today's bar 55).hth

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The "emphasis" i was referring to was the use of lite gray(vs.black or red) for non-dom gaussians LINES on my charts.

Edited October 23, 2010 by patrader

[Spydertrader 10]

The "emphasis" i was referring to was the use of lite gray(vs.black or red) for non-dom gaussians lines on my charts.

 

Thanks for providing additional clarification for me.

 

- Spydertrader

[patrader 10]

Thanks for providing additional clarification for me.

 

- Spydertrader

 

YW.Transferring correctly in this medium for me can be a challenge it appears.

[Breakeven 10]

O.K. Now, if if you know something ended at 10:30 on the 15th, and that something represents the exact same something that ended on the 13th (at 2:15), then you also know what must come next with respect to the next thing (which begins at 10:30 on the 15th).

 

Yes.

 

Have you annotated in the exact same fashion (based on context, pace and order of events) for each of these two areas?

 

Previous Chart

 

Newly posted revised chart snip.

 

Note the location differences in the medium weight pink line.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Those two charts are not annotated in the same way.

 

Previous Chart

shows my original annotations for Traverse #3 of the Channel which I believe now to be incorrect.

 

Newly posted revised chart snip shows annotations for Traverse #3 that must be correct but I am having issues as to how best to arrive at the fact it is a Traverse. This is what led to my question about ES only or needing to use the YM?

 

I am really sorry for the misunderstanding, I should have been more clear when posting those charts.

 

In an effort to redeem myself a bit, attached is a chart of the entire 10-13 to 10-15 timeframe under discussion. I do have issues with the last Traverse on this chart but I feel like I am heading in the right direction.

 

Thank you very much for your patient advice!

[patrader 10]

On another note,lately i have been putting alot of effort in reference to anything "non-dominant "in order to better annotate and read this portion of the order of events.I reviewed spydertrader's more recent charts(price and volume panes) and his comments both here and in other journals.One of the reasons was i noticed that sometimes volume bars may "increase"(in relation to the previous bar) but he still annotated a non-dominant gaussian line on his chart(especially on the medium and thick lines).This at first appeared to not confirm to the gaussian volume sequences as shown on page one of this journal.What i discovered of course, was others had crossed this path before and advice had been offered. Quote from dkm:

 

Frequently I see increasing volume on the non dom traverse from pt2 to pt3 and then pt3 forms with decreasing volume in the dominant direction. This is not a rare occurence and it continues to confuse me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Three things create the scenario you describe.

 

1. Formation Break Outs (as you have in your clip)

 

2. 'Missed' (ommitted annotation) channels

 

3. Intra-Bar Gaussian Shift (Price switches from Dominant to Non-Dominant Intra-Bar)

 

If you have any (or a combination) of the three, anticipate seeing increasing Volume on the Non-Dominant Traverse.

 

- Spydertrader Check out the "increasing" black bar at 10:05 est.First it comes after the dom red down sequence then the market forms a ftp(see number 1 scenario above) formation and breaks out on "increased" volume but this is still a non-dominant event.This "aha" explained the volume pane confusion but what about the price pane? Then i found this by spyder"Gaussian lines track dominant vs non-dominant Price Movement".Price movement? WOW.If the red down sequence is dom than this black price sequence has to be non-dom and next the dom sequence will be red and that would complete the order of events at least on this fractal.Of course, you got the nesting and possible ve's plus maybe fanning the rtl but this really helped me "see" things better.hth

[cnms2 10]

...

OBs are new PT1s.

R2Rs are were black RTLs are crossed.

Try to be very accurate with your annotations, and build them up from the finest observable both on volume and price.

[Spydertrader 10]

This is what led to my question about ES only or needing to use the YM?

 

Your latest annotations bring you much, much closer to the actual information provided by the market.

 

Some things to keep in mind:

 

1. Your Pink (first one) down Traverse has a Point One in the incorrect location. If the medium pink trend lines represent acceleration, you do not have a new Point One. The first tape, the first traverse and the channel itself all have the same Point One (Red Number One on your chart) - always and without exception.

 

2. Note the Pace changes. Pace influences all frctals - not just medium and thick.

 

With respect to the use of the YM, pull up a YM chart for the timeframe of your final down traverse (ending at 10:30). What does the YM show you that you cannot see on the ES? Now, look back at the ES. What thing appears to have obscured your view?

 

Use the YM to locate answers for when you find yourself 'stuck.' Apply these answers onto the ES. Soon, you'll see through the fog which appears to obscure your current view.

 

In such a fashion, you'll learn how not become 'stuck' in the first place.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Edit: Please note the above post with respect to the use of the YM does not advocate use of the YM for trading purposes (even though, one could do so with positive results). The above post advises using the YM for learning purposes during periods of debrief in an effort to learn to see that which a trader might not yet have learned to see.

 

Nothing more. Nothing less.

Edited October 23, 2010 by Spydertrader
clarification of YM use

[Spydertrader 10]

Transferring correctly in this medium for me can be a challenge it appears.

 

LOL. Welcome to my world. :rofl:

 

- Spydertrader

[cnms2 10]

"Your current 'view' of the market as transitioning from increasing to decreasing to increasing again (in terms of Volume) doesn't provide the most accurate interpretation. Instead, monitor from the standpoint of dominant to non-dominant and back to dominant again.

 

Use the Gaussians as an 'indicator' of dominance in order to have them 'match' the trend lines. On many of my charts, the non-dominant portion of the Gaussians do not have the same color as the Volume bars tracked. In other words, the Gaussian lines track dominant vs non-dominant Price Movement, rather than Volume bar coloration. The subtle difference often sits where one finds the market 'mode'.

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader"

 

A few portions of spydertrader's comments jumped out at me.First,NON-DOM GAUSSIANS many times DO NOT have the SAME COLOR as the volume bars tracked.Second,dom vs non-dom gaussian lines track PRICE MOVEMENT,rather that volume bar coloration.Third,use the gaussians as an "INDICATOR" of dominance.Hence the emphasis on dominant gaussians and less on non-dom gaussians as my "indicator" of market dominance.hth

From outside may seem amusing how we read the same things, but emphasize and conclude different things. To me the highlighted phrase says that alternation in dominance should be reflected in the annotated color (as it is important), but that it is not always the same as the volume bars' color. For a red container the gaussians should be R2R2B2R while volume bars may not exactly mirror this (note: the first R is the last non-dominant of the previous, overlapped black container).

[cnms2 10]

... Check out the "increasing" black bar at 10:05 est...

Me view is that the up move starts on the 0955 bar (5th bar of that day), and then accelerates. That chart dates from before this thread, and it doesn't include the adjusted carry-over.

[patrader 10]

Me view is that the up move starts on the 0955 bar (5th bar of that day), and then accelerates. That chart dates from before this thread, and it doesn't include the adjusted carry-over.

 

Interesting observation.So if this chart had been degapped the 9:55 bar would be a pt 1 of the new up sequence and spydertrader would have annotated the carryover differently?

Edited October 24, 2010 by patrader

[Breakeven 10]

Your latest annotations bring you much, much closer to the actual information provided by the market.

 

Progress!

 

The first tape, the first traverse and the channel itself all have the same Point One (Red Number One on your chart) - always and without exception.

 

Thank you for this. On a somewhat related note, is it possible to have more than just a down Traverse(s) en route from Pt 1 to Pt 2 of a Channel? For example, would it be possible to have Down Traverse > Up Traverse > Down Traverse between Pt 1 and Pt 2 of the Channel?

 

I have always believed that Pt 1 to Pt 2 of a Channel must be a "single" (acc's notwithstanding) Traverse. But over the last few days I have begun to question this assertion.

 

2. Note the Pace changes. Pace influences all frctals - not just medium and thick.

 

I want to do some more investigation on this before I pester you with my craziness.

 

With respect to the use of the YM, pull up a YM chart for the timeframe of your final down traverse (ending at 10:30). What does the YM show you that you cannot see on the ES? Now, look back at the ES. What thing appears to have obscured your view?

 

Yes! I knew I was on the right track here! A bit more investigation to gain some certainty and this one will be put to bed.

 

Use the YM to locate answers for when you find yourself 'stuck.' Apply these answers onto the ES. Soon, you'll see through the fog which appears to obscure your current view.

 

In such a fashion, you'll learn how not become 'stuck' in the first place.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Edit: Please note the above post with respect to the use of the YM does not advocate use of the YM for trading purposes (even though, one could do so with positive results). The above post advises using the YM for learning purposes during periods of debrief in an effort to learn to see that which a trader might not yet have learned to see.

 

Nothing more. Nothing less.

 

I felt like I had just sat down for an all you can eat buffet while reading this post. Choice morsels everywhere!

 

Thank you so very much for your time and patience!

[cnms2 10]

... I have always believed that Pt 1 to Pt 2 of a Channel must be a "single" (acc's notwithstanding) Traverse. But over the last few days I have begun to question this assertion....

See post #4 .

[patrader 10]

From outside may seem amusing how we read the same things, but emphasize and conclude different things. To me the highlighted phrase says that alternation in dominance should be reflected in the annotated color (as it is important), but that it is not always the same as the volume bars' color. For a red container the gaussians should be R2R2B2R while volume bars may not exactly mirror this (note: the first R is the last non-dominant of the previous, overlapped black container).

 

Exactly.Most important for me is knowing where the market is in its order of events and whether the market is in a dominant or non-dominant sequence of the order of events not the "color" of my non-dominant gaussian line.I call the "point" of the first R(or B) a "1.5" because that is where the dominant side of R2R(or B2B) takes control.The first R(or B) is the retrace(non-dom) and the second part (dom)of R2R(or B2B) is the reversal breaking thru the RTL of the previous container.hth

[gucci 10]

Some of you might find this chart from Spydertrader VERY informative.

 

Pay attention where points 123 are annotated because they are the points of a trading fractal.(aka traverse)

 

One can learn quite a few things analysing the green 123 (accelerated) starting at 11:50 (close of the bar) and how they fit into the context of blue 123 starting at 10:00.

 

The next area of interest is the pink 123 and the acelerated 123 inside of this traverse.

 

PAY ATTENTION to the POSITION AND COLOUR of the 123 starting at 13:35 (close of the bar).

 

Enjoy some ahas.

Edited October 24, 2010 by gucci
Stupid rules of TL.

[gucci 10]

Some of you might find this chart from Spydertrader VERY informative.

 

Pay attention where points 123 are annotated because they are the points of a trading fractal.(aka traverse)

 

One can learn quite a few things analysing the green 123 (accelerated) starting at 11:50 (close of the bar) and how they fit into the context of blue 123 starting at 10:00.

 

The next area of interest is the pink 123 and the acelerated 123 inside of this traverse.

 

PAY ATTENTION to the POSITION AND COLOUR of the 123 starting at 13:35 (close of the bar).

 

Enjoy some ahas.

 

 

 

 

There is one VERY important question on the table here. WHY did the market suggest not to move a point 1 of an accelerated traverse (that started at 13:35) to 14:05?

 

PAY ATTENTION to the annotated TAPES.

 

Sometimes the only thing one has to do to solve a problem is to ask the right questions.

Edited October 24, 2010 by gucci

[zt379 10]

There is one VERY important question on the table here. WHY did the market suggest not to move a point 1 of an accelerated traverse (that started at 13:35) to 14:05?

 

PAY ATTENTION to the annotated TAPES.

 

Sometimes the only thing one has to do to solve a problem is to ask the right questions.

 

Is it because we hadn't had a Brown P3 yet by 14:05?

And the reason we hadn't had a Brown P3 by 14:05 is because all price action is still contained within the first Tape from Brown P1 to Brown P2 until 14:10?

In other words, we can't have a new P1 of anything until we've had a P3 of the previous thing we were building?

And we couldn't have had the P3 until we had a separate container (Tape here 14.10 to 14.20) from P2?

Edited October 24, 2010 by zt379