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

patrader, as an assignment use the picture attached and place your pt1,p2 and p3 of your different fractals in respective places.

 

You may have an "aha" moment.

 

HTH

 

Credits go to Nkhoi

fractal3.thumb.png.5fada0a28ab65d1cbb6bc79b353fcf3e.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL did make one mistake on the pt1-2-3 drill....the first chart is a downtrend so the pt3's should all be red not black and the second chart is a uptrend so of course all the pt3's should also be black.....sorry for any confusion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:
The lateral formation continues until terminated with two closes outside the Lateral boundaries (created from the High / Low of Bar 1) - except where the 'two closes' form a 'flaw.' In such a case, we require a 'third' close outside the lateral boundary in order to have reached 'termination' of the previous lateral.

 

Here is my latest refinement of ways a lateral can be "killed" (with enlightment from jbarnby).

The lateral formation continues until terminated with two closes outside the Lateral boundaries (created from the High / Low of Bar 1) - except where the 'two closes' form a 'flaw' (internal formation) and the second bar of this internal is on DECREASING VOLUME.In such a case, we require a 'third' close outside the lateral boundary in order to have reached 'termination' of the previous lateral.If the second bar of the internal formation is on INCREASING VOLUME then the lateral is terminated (killed) and does not require the "third" close outside the lateral boundary.hth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:
[/u] As to whether or not an I.B.G.S. on increasing Volume does or does not terminate a lateral. Does it?

 

 

- Spydertrader

 

Continuing the refinement of possible ways a lateral formation are terminated (killed) i have found that ibgs's on increasing volume where the ibgs breaks outside the boundary of the lateral does kill it (no matter where the close of the bar).Ibgs's on increasing volume where the high/low are fully inside the lateral boundaries do not kill it.Ibgs's on decreasing volume do not kill a lateral.OB's(outside bars) also follow the same rules as ibgs's when the ob is also an ibgs.hth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  patrader said:
Here is my latest refinement of ways a lateral can be "killed" (with enlightment from jbarnby).

The lateral formation continues until terminated with two closes outside the Lateral boundaries (created from the High / Low of Bar 1) - except where the 'two closes' form a 'flaw' (internal formation) and the second bar of this internal is on DECREASING VOLUME.In such a case, we require a 'third' close outside the lateral boundary in order to have reached 'termination' of the previous lateral.If the second bar of the internal formation is on INCREASING VOLUME then the lateral is terminated (killed) and does not require the "third" close outside the lateral boundary.hth

 

I like to refer to these as "guidelines" and not rules. I had this same discussion with a couple of my students this week about reading the market. Same applies to using IBGS or OB's to kill laterals. First and foremost, I default to the sequences and determine can we use a specific bar(s)/volume to complete a sequence or not. Because when you think about it, the role of most laterals (not all) is to take us from 2-3 of something, right? How we go about completing something can depend on how/when we kill the lat, as well as the type of lateral we're working with.

 

Sequences sequences sequences!! Just ask the students who have progressed to my live trading room - what do I harp on all day every day. Without hesitation they would tell you "sequences". Become proficient at those and you'll know exactly when your fractal has completed and exactly when you have permission to look for change.

 

I had a student yesterday who got a little rattled in real-time by the 1120 bar. But there should have been no question at that point in time - the market had NOT yet completed it's sequence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  jbarnby said:
Spyder,

 

I have a question about the attached snippet. Specifically, the 1310 bar on 08/5 (highlighted in yellow). From time to time I run across an area such as this, where I am unable to ftt the bar on any fractal. The gaussians support that this area completes the 2-3 movement, but is that possible with the ve? I'm very familiar with the valuable discussion between Romanus and PointeOne on this topic.

 

Does such an event tell me that I have taped the area incorrectly? What am I missing here?

 

.attachment.php?attachmentid=13015&stc=1&d=1250658768

 

  Spydertrader said:
While the event which you describe may indeed point to errors in annotation technique, in this specific example, no errors exist (with respect to the area under discussion).

 

 

 

Either, you do not see something which provides the FTT or you do not see a contextual difference which indicates the possibility an environment exists which has the ability to obscure that which you expect to see.

 

- Spydertrader

 

  jbarnby said:
After review, and comparing the 1310 bar from 08/05 to a few others, I notice that volume accelerates in this area in a fashion similar to what we used to call Peak Volume. Seems I recall that PV would frequently mask an FTT on a VE of the tape.

 

Jbarnby,just came across this in the thread and want to thank you for posting this big time.What a huge AH HA.I have attached a chart with volume of the same day so the PEAK VOLUME (which is not labeled on that chart but should have been with a P) can be seen on that bar (keep in mind its the 12:10 bar on that chart due to the labeling of time being off by one hour).hth

8-5-2009.thumb.jpg.b8c2fa2efe6cb944ee7415de754cb086.jpg

Edited by patrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  jbarnby said:

 

Sequences sequences sequences!!

 

  Spydertrader said:
Sure thing. Let's start by taking a look at today's (6-22) S & P 500 E-Mini (The ES) using a five minute chart. Thinking fractally, we want to locate the Volume Sequences which the market displays all day, every day in every market. By describing these Volume Sequences using Volume Color (Black for Up and Red for Down), a trader should expect to see R 2 R 2 B 2 R (for a down trend) and B 2 B 2 R 2 B for an Up Trend. Again, thinking fractally, the market should provide these sequences on each and every trading fractal.

 

An example of a very fast fractal:

 

11635d1245729253-open-free-discussion-volume-fractal1.jpg

 

An example of a slightly less fast fractal:

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=11636&stc=1&d=1245729260

 

An example of a slow fractal:

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=11637&stc=1&d=1245729260

 

An example of the slowest fractal:

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=11638&stc=1&d=1245729260

 

 

As you can see, irrespective of the chosen fractal, the market provides the same exact sequences. Combine these fractals, and a trader can 'see' that which must complete.

 

Learning to thoroughly and properly 'contain' Price and Volume in order to more easily see these sequences represents the first step toward profitability.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Interestingly enough what i believe is the best examples by spydertrader of sequences are not in this thread but a short lived earlier thread(Open and Free Discussion on Volume).It appears that the fractal encased by thicker purple trendlines in the 10-3-2012 chart by jbarnby corresponds to the slow fractal example.hth

5aa711a536325_10-3-12jbarnby.thumb.png.1e12602a7d5844f948256018675ff917.png

Edited by patrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B2B2R2B and R2R2B2R.Reference materals are forestgaussians.pdf (http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/e-mini-futures-trading-laboratory/5920-ideal-volume-channel-up-down-4.html#post66298)posted by spydertrader in Ideal Volume in Channel UP/Down(post #32) and Avi 8 post #2195 in this thread http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/technical-analysis/6320-price-volume-relationship-275.html

B2B2R2B.jpg.148ecb5bf5adc18b36e50744a7ec67bc.jpg

R2R2B2R.jpg.547e9a482bc6767dcce659643d559815.jpg

Edited by patrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cleaned up the "example of slow fractal" (see attached).Corrected some of the price and matching volume bars to have correct bar coloration.Added the slightly faster nested gaussians.I believe this is same fractal weighting used by jbarnby's in the 10-3-2012 purple thick down container(traverse).One interesting side note is the placement location of the "trough" of R2R of traverse.There is some comments by spydertrader where the location of the R2R traverse trough may be located starting on http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/technical-analysis/6320-price-volume-relationship-271.html post #2167.hth

5aa711a6aee4f_exampleofaslowfractalmodified.thumb.JPG.fa74ee6afdc9de6a142048d1020c48bc.JPG

5aa711a6bd414_10-3-12jbarnby.thumb.png.5356e3e898cdde93e9d5f262b82d2677.png

Edited by patrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  patrader said:
Cleaned up the "example of slow fractal" (see attached).Corrected some of the price and matching volume bars to have correct bar coloration.Added the slightly faster nested gaussians.I believe this is same fractal weighting used by jbarnby's in the 10-3-2012 purple thick down container(traverse).One interesting side note is the placement location of the "trough" of R2R of traverse.There is some comments by spydertrader where the location of the R2R traverse trough may be located starting on http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/technical-analysis/6320-price-volume-relationship-271.html post #2167.hth

 

patrader, nicely done. Are you able to determine what the above is? (tape, traverse or channel)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[2:29:00 PM] Erica Walker: sometimes it does feel like this method is magic. i'm having a "smh" moment in a little bit of awe...!

 

A realtime skype quote from one of my "newer" students today in our trading room. I thought her comment was pretty cool.

 

Stay motivated!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dE06WoI.jpg

 

what do you guys think of the outcome for this stock?

 

I think it looks extremely bullish with the price increasing with the volume whereas the stock decreased on decreasing volume. Also the stock has past the possibility of it being a correction in the trend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  jbarnby said:
[2:29:00 PM] Erica Walker: sometimes it does feel like this method is magic. i'm having a "smh" moment in a little bit of awe...!

 

A realtime skype quote from one of my "newer" students today in our trading room. I thought her comment was pretty cool.

Magic, really? Wait till she gets into muddy hours. Sorry, can't help to burst out my thought about someone showing me how magical moving average was years ago.

 

  jbarnby said:
Stay motivated!!

Definitely!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  edgararakelyan said:
dE06WoI.jpg

 

what do you guys think of the outcome for this stock?

 

I think it looks extremely bullish with the price increasing with the volume whereas the stock decreased on decreasing volume. Also the stock has past the possibility of it being a correction in the trend.

 

Without a fully (and correctly) annotated chart one cannot say whether the trend is near completion or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Scooty said:
Magic, really? Wait till she gets into muddy hours. Sorry, can't help to burst out my thought about someone showing me how magical moving average was years ago.{/QUOTE]

 

well, she's been working on learning and perfecting the method for over a year....I'd say she's more than familiar with what you call "muddy hours". And yes, magic is not an overstatement IF one knows how to track all sequences on every fractal. (I'm guessing you don't?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  jbarnby said:
  Scooty said:
Magic, really? Wait till she gets into muddy hours. Sorry, can't help to burst out my thought about someone showing me how magical moving average was years ago.{/QUOTE]

 

well, she's been working on learning and perfecting the method for over a year....I'd say she's more than familiar with what you call "muddy hours". And yes, magic is not an overstatement IF one knows how to track all sequences on every fractal. (I'm guessing you don't?)

 

My bad, I don't mean to insult you. Personally, I have gone through a looping journey of thinking I found a 'magic' with a new idea but realized later it was just a 'one-time' magic.

 

If you could make your student to see REAL magic with barely more than a year in learning the method disclosed here, you sure know the bottle-necks in learning this method. Why not squeeze a tiny portion of your time to put up a series of one or two examples with helpful and direct clues to clarify various topics in Spydertrader's concept of sequences which should go beyond application to ideal scenario? Then leave people here to learn by themselves.

 

I appreciate a lot if you take up my suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  wilddog said:
patrader, nicely done. Are you able to determine what the above is? (tape, traverse or channel)

 

 

patrader, sorry for confusing you with an A-Team member. I had a look through this thread and can see you have been working on this for years. Like others struggling :doh:, “Stay motivated”

 

It is good to review the basics and fundamentals like you did with internals. However, don’t overcomplicate things.

 

If you are getting stuck with the fractal drill, reverse engineer it. (What isn’t it?)

 

HTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something to think about:

 

 

A fractal is a mathematical set that has a fractal dimension that usually exceeds its topological dimension[1] and may fall between the integers.[2] Fractals are typically self-similar patterns, where self-similar means they are "the same from near as from far".[3] Fractals may be exactly the same at every scale, or, as illustrated in Figure 1, they may be nearly the same at different scales.[2][4][5][6] The definition of fractal goes beyond self-similarity per se to exclude trivial self-similarity and include the idea of a detailed pattern repeating itself.[2]:166; 18[4][7]

 

Fractal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

HTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Scooty said:
  jbarnby said:

 

My bad, I don't mean to insult you. Personally, I have gone through a looping journey of thinking I found a 'magic' with a new idea but realized later it was just a 'one-time' magic.

I wasn't insulted at all...i realized when I said "newer" that wasn't a fair explanation of her experience.

 

 

If you could make your student to see REAL magic with barely more than a year in learning the method disclosed here, you sure know the bottle-necks in learning this method. Why not squeeze a tiny portion of your time to put up a series of one or two examples with helpful and direct clues to clarify various topics in Spydertrader's concept of sequences which should go beyond application to ideal scenario? Then leave people here to learn by themselves.

 

I appreciate a lot if you take up my suggestion.

 

Your request is not unreasonable...and you're not the first to request it. Nothing would have pleased me more than if I could have simply referred my friends (earliest students) to this thread and set them free to learn the method. But unfortunately, while there is a WEALTH of information herein, I didn't find it enough (for me personally) to fully understand fractals. Other's experience might be different however.

 

As to why I don't provide more direct clues....I try to walk a very fine line. Why? Because I wish to respect Spyder's wishes as to how much information is fully revealed in a public forum. Clearly he could have chosen to provide direct answers throughout this thread, but he chose a different path, wanting the market to provide those answers, not the teacher. Whether we agree or disagree over his method of teaching, it is what it is. What I have done is posted fully annotated charts (something he chose not to do) and provided some clues as to where I found helpful information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  jbarnby said:
But unfortunately, while there is a WEALTH of information herein, I didn't find it enough (for me personally) to fully understand fractals.

 

jbarnby,

 

Thank you for your contributions to this thread, especially your recent postings. I have a couple of very sincere questions. What do you suggest, to those of us still trying to fully understand fractals? If the information in this thread isn't enough and if someone isn't already your friend (and therefore cannot join your chat room), where does one turn? Can you give us a few clues without crossing the line you wrote about above?

 

-river

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  river said:
jbarnby,

 

Thank you for your contributions to this thread, especially your recent postings. I have a couple of very sincere questions. What do you suggest, to those of us still trying to fully understand fractals? If the information in this thread isn't enough and if someone isn't already your friend (and therefore cannot join your chat room), where does one turn? Can you give us a few clues without crossing the line you wrote about above?

 

-river

 

river you have been on this thread long enough to know that is a rhetorical question. The day Spyder left

 

so say we all

Edited by wilddog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  jbarnby said:
One of my favorite exercises in this entire thread. In fact, I love this channel drill so much that I use it as part of the training for each of my students. There's a TON of information within this drill, and it may take you a long time to piece it all together, but it has a bit of everything that one uses in their daily decision making process...sub fractals, containers, ve's, pace accelerations, unobservable events, etc...this list goes on! If you have a problem maintaining fractal integrity, this drill will be a challenge.

 

I don't have time to lead a discussion on this exercise, but I thought it worthwhile for some of you to revisit this drill, and perhaps work through it together.

 

Spyder tells us that a new channel begins at 1415 on 10/13/10. The channel ends at 1030 on 10/15/10.

 

Good luck!

 

 

I want to work through these channels---was wondering if anyone had some un-annotated charts for the 13th, 14th and 15th----my data doesn't go back that far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Stevecs said:
Sorry to be a bit ot here but what is the significance of the thin break lines in some of the formation boxes in the attached TN chart ?

 

Thanks, Steve

 

Software formatting, no significance

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.