The Price / Volume Relationship

[outsource 10]

Very interesting. I take it you used custom code in ninja to force the open to always match the close of each bar? Why did you do it? Is that something the original method creators suggested, or is it something you discovered? Can you expand on the rationale or benefit or how it came to be?

 

Aside from that, let's say you ended up on a given tape with the same TL/FTT situation I described, then what? Do both speeds have to FTT, or is it an either/or type of thing?

 

Yes,i used custom coding to get ninja to display de-gaped bars.It`s free,you can download it from NT Support portal,btw.The only shame about them is that they are not time based.But you can do some workaround drills to start to get uesd to them.And yes,Jack always said that having the de-gaped monitor is mandatory.He also used to say:''Do drills to learn how markets work''.

 

Go there,download the no-gap bars,and do the drills.Soon you`ll start to figure out is it`s either/or type of situation.

[stepan7 10]

Sure, here's one. I'm only showing price, in order to isolate the question I'm asking. I didn't want to comb back through charts, so I'm using today and have modified one TL to illustrate my question (i know it's not a correct TL now).

 

Assumptions: We have 3 BBTs, each with a 123ftt, and the overall Tape (green TLs) has a full volume cycle and incr vol after Pt3. Also assume we get a valid down tape after this.

 

That sets the stage for what I'm really asking, which is can we FTT the tape when the slower thing (tape TL) are a VE, but the faster thing (BBT TL) does FTT?

 

Or is it vice versa, we have to FTT the Tape (green TL) but it's Ok if the faster thing ends on a VE? Or do both have to FTT no matter what?

 

please see attached chart

 

 

Today's chart 2015.06.03 ES

 

Edited June 4, 2015 by stepan7

[outsource 10]

The drills is in the enclosed.Do as Jack says in there.Pick as much charts and start to annotate channels and volume.DO IT WITH THE GAPPLESS DISPLAY!

 

Therre is no shortcut - nobody would help you by posting a chart for you .Only you and your drills would lead you somewhere,probably.

 

Caveat.Jack had possesed some really good trait that some of the shamans and gypsies posses.When you`ll be working with the enclosed document,at some point, you`ll start to feel ''lack of roads'',"gobbledygook'',''gibberish'' - the readings start to overwhelm you,in other words.Don`t worry about this,pause,step aside.Outline the main points - resume.

Channels_for_BW_v2.2.pdf

[Mandelbrot 10]

please see attached chart

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have a comment on VE wait for next Bar. Where is m1,m2. I see the m1 (non dominant movement) where is the m2?

 

That FBP is decreasing volume, by definition that bar is non dominant. I dont see a return to dominance. If that bar was not an internal things would be different

 

Secondly I see that red container as a faster fractal traverse and not a traverse.

[plantrader 10]

please see attached chart

 

 

Today's chart 2015.06.03 ES

 

 

Stepan7, thanks for the chart. I see what I'm calling a BBT and Tape, you're calling a Tape and Traverse. Using your terminology & the markup of the chart I posted, your Traverse doesn't FTT. It ends on a VE, but your Tape does FTT.

 

Your view, and what you've found over the years is that that's Ok? Remember, the assumption is that we get a valid down Traverse after that (forget that it was yesterday's chart & something else happened afterwards; using this as simple illustration of a general question). I'm only asking whether both speeds need to FTT in order to end the Traverse. Or is it fine if only the Tape FTTs and not the Traverse? Or if only the Traverse FTTs but not the Tape?

Edited June 4, 2015 by plantrader

[xioxxio 10]

Quote from the late great Jack

 

"Sorry to be so tardy in responding.

 

I'll try to be thorough with my comments. These comments will remove the "sometimes" aspect of what you re sensing and processing.

 

Very good use of terminology. The terminology goes a long ways toward having a consistent logging process.

 

During any time you are using three nested fractals. The middle fractal is the trading fractal.

 

Anytime you are in trades and using MADA and annotating and logging. you deal with the fastest fractal first (FFF was the term used for shorthand).

 

Your comments concern the apparent lack of consistency after ve's. You also comment on WMCN during a ve.

 

This being the case, I will go thorough the order of events on the table and in doing so, I will remove the "sometimes" by drilling down to give you a "tree" that handles all the branches.

 

Let me give you the short answer first.

 

I apologize for past posts that may not have been clear to you. I have difficulty covering all the bases for everyone in any given post.

 

1. IF you see a VE test it for the zone which is a close on or beyond the original ltl.

 

2. Examine the next faster fractal pattern and see, if during the bar, the pattern completed. You know you know how to handle a completing pattern on a faster tractal. If there was completion, do the usual regarding the trading fractal which had the VE.

 

That was the short answer. And it is telling you to trade point to point on the trading fractal from now on. You earned the right by your awareness of doing steps 1 and 2 above.

 

Lets work further into the scene of WMCN coming into a VE and what happens after a VE.

 

As usual, volume leads price and this is how "sometimes" gets eliminated.

 

All VE's or ve's occur after point 3. This means volume has been dominant for a while and it (volume) is telling you something about how all three nested fractals are behaving. Look at you log and size up WMCN on each fractal, particularly with regard to volume and the P's and T's on those three fractals.

 

You are looking at arriving at a P or going further towards a P in the next few bars. Get the context by looking at the page number of your log. Look at the bar number of your log. Look at the market PACE and determine the contemporary PACE shift going on. This is just my "tuning" you up a little here and there. Context is where "sometimes" came from for you.

 

Look at the pattern and consider the five volume signals: P, T, P, T, P. Steps 1 and 2 handles the last P only. That is the next faster fractal was "completing".

 

The LTL is where peaks occur or where VE's occur or soon a peak will occur. So increasing volume is a context for coming to an ltl , going through an ltl and completing a faster fractal pattern.

 

3. If the volume is peaking at less than the max volume from pt 1 to pt 2 and the volume difference going from the minimum trough @ pt 3 then the trading fractal has also completed its pattern concurrently with the nest faster fractal.

 

So now you have context and 3 steps for consideration. We now look at the players and who is whom. Spyder has emphasized interbar gausian shifts and they are named IBGS. Here the intrabar context is examined.

 

As you saw, the zone was examined and you know that you know the prior bar WAS NOT IN THAT ZONE for the first VE occurance. What about when price is operating to make another VE or price is staying in the zone for more than one bar. Look to volume more closely and look at either side of the market: the dominant or the non dominant. You will be surprised, I believe. The "tells" are in how each side is behaving and just who is in the majority and minority.

 

This is tough to deal with at first but soon the intellect takes charge and "sometimes" goes away simply because you are in one or the other branch of a tree. I am taking you there to the branches so you can then, through experience, take the correct branch on each occasion of branching.

 

4. If the faster fractal did not complete, then you have to deal with a non dominant leg followed by a dominant leg to get to completion.

 

5. Toss in a bookmark at the extreme of the VE and watch volume and price work.

 

6. If you have 4. in play then treat the VE as a new point 2 and the FTT of M1 as the new point 3.

 

7. Your reversal on the extreme of the VE let you go through the IBGS, if any, on the correct side of the market. A IBGS is a good piece in terms of WMCN to complete a nondominant leg. In point to point trading, you trade M1 and M2. In FTT to FTT trading you sit through M1 and M2 to get the two legs of the faster fractal completed.

 

In this point I am asking you to get sharpe on volume and how it leads price. I am also asking you to get sharpe on the relative nature of either non dominant or dominant volume.

 

What you are reading is me going to where you are and opening door after door for you to begin to look through. As you do, you are satisfying a NEED that your mind has notified you that the NEED exists.

 

So several new pieces, for you, have appeared. you mind is calling each piece a "what". all of these "whats" have places to go to in your mind. They are goi9ng to "where" they want to reside. They will make friends with the pieces already there. They will begin to fit into your already orderly mind. All this collection of pieces is forming a spectrum all orderly according to the work the pieces do for you. The spectrum is called "differentiation".

 

You have accomplished a lot. Your mind is asking for more pieces so "sometimes" goes away and more "consistency" results from having a tree of paths that contain all the orders of events that can occur according to the system of MADA, the pattern and the interconnections of the nested fractals.

 

As all these "whats" find "where" the mind will be keeping them, you will notice there is an assembly line going on to build your mind into a differentiated organization. You are, thus, approaching unconscious competence.

 

Coherence, which you have, is a requirement for building the mind. In contrast, betting, prediction and money and risk management, are incoherent and the mind does not get built. All it does instead is the OODA loop of being like a fighter pilot in a death struggle.

 

Congratulations.

 

Trading simply becomes like driving a car when your mind becomes more or less differentiated."

 

[stepan7 10]

Sorry guys, I can discuss only things presented by Spydertrader at the beginning of this thread.

Edited June 4, 2015 by stepan7

[plantrader 10]

Sorry guys, I can discuss only things presented by Spydertrader at the beginning of this thread.

 

Stepan, since FTTs are part of the material, are you up for saying whether you'd ever end a Traverse on a VE bar? If yes, would the faster thing (tape) have to FTT, or do you feel both need to FTT? By definition, a VE is not a "failure to traverse" (it did traverse), so I'm just wondering what your long-timer view is. In the chart I posted, isolating only the question I asked... your Traverse ends on a VE. On that day (yesterday) it may not have ended there, but I'm only asking about that specific aspect.

 

Edit: I'm not sure what your view is, because you say on VE wait for next bar, but the next bar is the inside bar of a FBP which is a short formation & therefore means the inside bar can't be the FTT bar.

 

Nobody else has given an opinion on whether they personally feel both the faster speed & medium speed need to FTT in order to deem the medium speed thing as ended. Do you guys think it's either/or, or do both have to?

 

It's just opinion stuff, guys, don't be shy. If your experience tells you something, right or wrong, what is it? You don't have to know that you're "right".

Edited June 4, 2015 by plantrader

[stepan7 10]

Stepan, since FTTs are part of the material, are you up for saying whether you'd ever end a Traverse on a VE bar? If yes, would the faster thing (tape) have to FTT, or do you feel both need to FTT? By definition, a VE is not a "failure to traverse" (it did traverse), so I'm just wondering what your long-timer view is. In the chart I posted, isolating only the question I asked... your Traverse ends on a VE. On that day (yesterday) it may not have ended there, but I'm only asking about that specific aspect.

 

Edit: I'm not sure what your view is, because you say on VE wait for next bar, but the next bar is the inside bar of a FBP which is a short formation & therefore means the inside bar can't be the FTT bar.

 

Nobody else has given an opinion on whether they personally feel both the faster speed & medium speed need to FTT in order to deem the medium speed thing as ended. Do you guys think it's either/or, or do both have to?

 

It's just opinion stuff, guys, don't be shy. If your experience tells you something, right or wrong, what is it? You don't have to know that you're "right".

 

1. Please see attached.

2. Please see attached.

3. The Third Tape that made VE of Traverse did not continue (i.e. no Higher High) but made FBP.

Above is enough to exit/scale-down long position.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2015 by stepan7

[plantrader 10]

1. Please see attached.

2. The Third Tape that made VE of Traverse did not continue but made FBP.

Above is enough to exit/scale-down long position.

 

 

Thanks for the reply. Then in this instance (as an isolated question) the Traverse could have ended on a VE bar, correct?

 

Now for a general question, allowing that volume and other factors may impact your viewpoint, to end what you call a Traverse (I call it a tape, same thing) do you require "anything" to FTT, if not your Traverse then your Tape? Either/or? Or not necessarily either?

[stepan7 10]

Thanks for the reply. Then in this instance (as an isolated question) the Traverse could have ended on a VE bar, correct?

 

Now for a general question, allowing that volume and other factors may impact your viewpoint, to end what you call a Traverse (I call it a tape, same thing) do you require "anything" to FTT, if not your Traverse then your Tape? Either/or? Or not necessarily either?

 

1. Correct. It's candidate for new Point 1 down.

2. Tape/Traverse/Channel

3. Spydertrader: "Unless and until the Volume Sequences complete on each and every fractal then (and only then) can the Price trend change."

[plantrader 10]

1. Correct. It's candidate for new Point 1 down.

2. Tape/Traverse/Channel

3. Spydertrader: "Unless and until the Volume Sequences complete on each and every fractal then (and only then) can the Price trend change."

 

Thanks, much appreciated. Sounds like for you (and spyder), as long as volume cycles complete, nothing actually has to FTT and ending on VEs is fine. Please let me know if I've misunderstood you and you do require at least "something" (some speed of container) to literally FTT no matter what. It sounds like you don't.

[stepan7 10]

Thanks, much appreciated. Sounds like for you (and spyder), as long as volume cycles complete, nothing actually has to FTT and ending on VEs is fine. Please let me know if I've misunderstood you and you do require at least "something" (some speed of container) to literally FTT no matter what. It sounds like you don't.

 

 

Always ask yourself question - "In order trend to continue - What must come next?"

[xioxxio 10]

Thanks, much appreciated. Sounds like for you (and spyder), as long as volume cycles complete, nothing actually has to FTT and ending on VEs is fine. Please let me know if I've misunderstood you and you do require at least "something" (some speed of container) to literally FTT no matter what. It sounds like you don't.

 

You do need an FTT. The whole point is to trade FTT to FTT. If you dont get an FTT on any fractal then it is sub-fractal. There are times when tapes are built inside tapes, traverses are built inside traverses, whatever you call it . They are not on your fractal.

 

It is very easy to wonder off the reservation.

[plantrader 10]

You do need an FTT. The whole point is to trade FTT to FTT. If you dont get an FTT on any fractal then it is sub-fractal. There are times when tapes are built inside tapes, traverses are built inside traverses, whatever you call it . They are not on your fractal.

 

It is very easy to wonder off the reservation.

 

That was my point, and is why I asked the question. I simply read the responses for what they were, as varying understandings of this method. Now we're getting somewhere, a discussion. Apparently, some folks don't require a FTT as long as they have full volume sequence on the necessary fractals.

 

You say we need a FTT, I happen to agree. Now the question is to you...which fractal(s) do you feel need a FTT? Both, either/or?

[xioxxio 10]

That was my point, and is why I asked the question. I simply read the responses for what they were, as varying understandings of this method. Now we're getting somewhere, a discussion. Apparently, some folks don't require a FTT as long as they have full volume sequence on the necessary fractals.

 

You say we need a FTT, I happen to agree. Now the question is to you...which fractal(s) do you feel need a FTT? Both, either/or?

 

You need an FTT of either, not both. Both would be ideal. If you do get an FTT of a container make sure you know which is the correct RTL to cross to stay on your trading fractal.

 

If you are going to speed up something make sure you know where the brakes are. Its like driving a car

[plantrader 10]

You need an FTT of either, not both. Both would be ideal. If you do get an FTT of a container make sure you know which is the correct RTL to cross to stay on your trading fractal.

 

If you are going to speed up something make sure you know where the brakes are. Its like driving a car

 

Thanks for the reply & opinion. That was my understanding of it also. It's good to hear what others who've been using this method for many years believe. Anyone else?

 

The topic about continuation (run-on tapes/traverses with multiple cycles) that necessitates RTL fanning vs legit change didn't go anywhere, maybe we can revisit that one again soon.

[cnms2 10]

Jack wrote several times on the subject of the relation between ftts on different fractals:

"An FTT on level 3 is and FTT on level 2 and the FTT on level 2 is an FTT on level 1. what follows an FTT on level 1 is a BO of the level 1 RTL."

 

Also, there is a discussion early in this thread between romanus and pointone about the ftt relation to pt1,2,3,ftt on other fractals.

[stepan7 10]

Jack wrote several times on the subject of the relation between ftts on different fractals:

 

 

Also, there is a discussion early in this thread between romanus and pointone about the ftt relation to pt1,2,3,ftt on other fractals.

 

Glad you found Jack's exact quote.

 

It's very important to stick to original Jack or Spydertrader sources and do not pollute brain with later "improvements" of JHM.

 

Stepan

[plantrader 10]

Glad you found Jack's exact quote.

 

It's very important to stick to original Jack or Spydertrader sources and do not pollute brain with later "improvements" of JHM.

 

Stepan

 

What or who is "JHM"?

[cnms2 10]

Can anybody post a link where spydertrader writes about "bbt", "equal weight of all legs", or such?

[Mandelbrot 10]

What or who is "JHM"?

 

JHM is Jack Hershey Method

[Mandelbrot 10]

Can anybody post a link where spydertrader writes about "bbt", "equal weight of all legs", or such?

 

FilterTip care to comment.

[jbarnby 10]

Can anybody post a link where spydertrader writes about "bbt", "equal weight of all legs", or such?

 

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/technical-analysis/6320-price-volume-relationship-46.html#post96963

 

One of my favorite posts from Spydertrader. He may not have discussed some of these items much (or at all) in this thread, but he certainly did (a lot) off the thread during one-on-one's.

[Mandelbrot 10]

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/technical-analysis/6320-price-volume-relationship-46.html#post96963

 

One of my favorite posts from Spydertrader. He may not have discussed some of these items much (or at all) in this thread, but he certainly did (a lot) off the thread during one-on-one's.

 

Equality comes from volume and not price. The blue container up is faster fractal traverse with a volume cycle. The red container down is a traverse but since it was preceded by a FF traverse it is also a FF traverse with a volume cycle. And so on.

 

Spyder always said focus on the volume pane not the price pane. Gaussians match containers.