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

  innersky said:
Romanus,

 

when/how did you know to fan the blue up traverse? It looked like a completed sequence to me at 14:05.

 

--

thanks,

 

innersky

Whatever thinking went into drawing the trendlines and gaussians at that time was obviously invalidated by the market. It's quite possible that we both incorrectly identified the Point One.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ehorn said:
I see several visible fractals on the 5M chart today...

 

Hi ehorn,

Does the green trendline represent "Traverse"?

Does the blue trendline represent "Tape"?

Please comment. TIA

5aa70f22f0b82_tapeandtraverse.thumb.gif.92bb594dcc56f9130cce366195413de7.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  NYCMB said:
Hi ehorn,

Does the green trendline represent "Traverse"?

Does the blue trendline represent "Tape"?

Please comment. TIA

 

This is how I have annotated it, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ehorn said:
This is how I have annotated it, yes.

With Spyder's definition of tapes on page 1, post #5, could someone PLEASE explain how on earth the blue trendline could be considered a "tape" and the green trendline a "traverse"?? :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dkm said:
With Spyder's definition of tapes on page 1, post #5, could someone PLEASE explain how on earth the blue trendline could be considered a "tape" and the green trendline a "traverse"?? :confused:

 

Hi dkm,

 

IMHO, Post #5 gives us a primer for the building blocks (i.e. BBT's).

 

As Spydertrader mentioned earlier,

 

"...begin with these smaller pieces and build from there. In such a fashion, you'll soon see how letters form words, and words become sentences. It is within these sentences that the market tells its story..."

 

With that, I have annotated the story I read for Friday...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Friday, September 11, 2009

 

  innersky said:
Imho, your first down traverse is not valid as the RTL gets broken (10:15) on decreasing volume...

innersky

 

Thanks for the feedback and your chart. There are usually a few parts where I can't get the price channels to match volume exactly (I could fix one part then it breaks another). So I try a best fit (or least bad fit). It's good to see everyone else's chart to compare these areas, good food for thought. :)

5aa70f23429b1_Sep92009A.thumb.PNG.973bfe7b144a78b8af5a92386514b15a.PNG

5aa70f23488ed_Sep102009A.thumb.PNG.62a1a4419404bb71eff49eef2740cb03.PNG

5aa70f234eacc_Sep112009A.thumb.PNG.9829eba5036bed5b5a09276770e8c71c.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dkm said:
With Spyder's definition of tapes on page 1, post #5, could someone PLEASE explain how on earth the blue trendline could be considered a "tape" and the green trendline a "traverse"?? :confused:
From Spydertrader's post #177:

Whatever
something "looks like" in the
Price
Pane falls under the catagory of
unimportant
because a tape does not
ever
look like a traverse (or anything else) when observing the
Volume
Pane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  cnms2 said:
From Spydertrader's post #177:

Whatever
something "looks like" in the
Price
Pane falls under the catagory of
unimportant
because a tape does not
ever
look like a traverse (or anything else) when observing the
Volume
Pane.

Also, check #75 and #77.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  cnms2 said:
Also, check #75 and #77.

 

With the greatest of respect, referring me to previous posts that I have read 100 times does not help. When someone remains unable to understand something it is often beneficial to offer an explanation from a different perspective or even, dare I say it, an annotated illustration. Responses of the nature "it's all been posted here before" serve only to frustrate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dkm said:
With the greatest of respect, referring me to previous posts that I have read 100 times does not help. When someone remains unable to understand something it is often beneficial to offer an explanation from a different perspective or even, dare I say it, an annotated illustration. Responses of the nature "it's all been posted here before" serve only to frustrate.
NYCMB's recent inquiry to ehorn attracted my attention because he posted that chart validated by Spydertrader. You expressed your doubt too, so I thought to reset the discussion to a calibration point. I have no intention to increase anybody's frustration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dkm said:
With Spyder's definition of tapes on page 1, post #5, could someone PLEASE explain how on earth the blue trendline could be considered a "tape" and the green trendline a "traverse"?? :confused:

 

 

let me be the devil...

 

PLEASE explain how on earth the blue trendline could NOT be considered a "tape" and the green trendline a "traverse"?? :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dkm said:
With the greatest of respect, referring me to previous posts that I have read 100 times does not help. When someone remains unable to understand something it is often beneficial to offer an explanation from a different perspective or even, dare I say it, an annotated illustration. Responses of the nature "it's all been posted here before" serve only to frustrate.

 

I can appreciate your question and enjoy it because it makes me think. So keeping it simple (and considering that critical component of M is still being refined) then I will humbly submit my analysis (just based on PT2 analysis only):

 

If THIS was a Traverse (which completed Friday morning) then the down traverse which is being built requires a PT2 outside of the previous up traverse. We did not get that on Friday. Now If the preceding link is in fact a channel, then it is quite possible that what was constructed on Friday was Pt1, 2 and 3 of a down traverse.

 

Frankly, I may very well be stuck in SLOW MOTION coming off of the summer pace here. But my PFC is established and I will continue on with the MADA asking WMCN as each bar forms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Addressing dkm's question, in the chart in question, there are clearly faster fractals than what is being called a tape here, and those faster fractals meet the definition of tape provided earlier by Spydertrader.

 

Thus it appears that "tape" is being used as a label for more than one level, so that "tapes" at the fastest level (on the basis of 2 bars, as in Spydertrader's original example) can construct larger tapes, not only traverses.

 

Perhaps someone could clarify this point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very wise man has said; "To get from square one to operational takes time and patience."

 

tapes? traverses? channels? These are all constructs for use in becoming operational...

 

Increasing, Decreasing, Continuing or Changing... and WMCN...

 

We perform the routine so that we may develop and refine our ability to become operational. Spydertrader has provided us all the tools needed to do this and through effort and experience we become more effective and efficient.

 

When emotions override logic step back and take a break. The market is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.

 

Developing the routine and learning to learn is what the journey entails.

 

But enjoy the journey. It is meant to be enjoyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Tams said:
let me be the devil...

 

PLEASE explain how on earth the blue trendline could NOT be considered a "tape" and the green trendline a "traverse"?? :confused:

 

Modified chart below....

 

"Accurately drawn trend lines in a chart Price Pane represent ‘containers’ of trend on the three trading fractals. We represent the fastest trading fractal using skinny lines (described as ‘tapes’) which, in turn, build the next slower fractal (represented by ‘medium’ weight lines) – known as a Traverse. These Medium fast trends (Traverses) build the slowest fractal (thick line weight) known as a ‘channel.’"...Spyder

 

It appears now that some are using "skinny tapes" to form "fat tapes" and "fat tapes" to form "even fatter tapes" etc etc. It is no wonder that many here are utterly confused with the terminology.

5aa70f2437c73_tapeandtraverse2.thumb.GIF.b50c31bc43449261923fc6c021be7bdc.GIF

Edited by dkm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dkm said:
Modified chart below....

 

"Accurately drawn trend lines in a chart Price Pane represent ‘containers’ of trend on the three trading fractals. We represent the fastest trading fractal using skinny lines (described as ‘tapes’) which, in turn, build the next slower fractal (represented by ‘medium’ weight lines) – known as a Traverse. These Medium fast trends (Traverses) build the slowest fractal (thick line weight) known as a ‘channel.’"...Spyder

 

It appears now that some are using "skinny tapes" to form "fat tapes" and "fat tapes" to form "even fatter tapes" etc etc. It is no wonder that many here are utterly confused with the terminology.

 

IMHO Taverses are ALWAYS made from Tapes, but not all tapes make a Traverese. In order for a tape to make a traverse, it must consist of at lease 5 bars and three tapes, one tape of accelleration, one of decelleration, followed by one of accelleration, forming points 1,2 and 3 of the traverse. And from my notes from NYC, one bar of decelleration does not equal decelleration. If anybody has anything to add, please do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Spydertrader's post #233:

While certainly, additional trading fractals (beyond skinny, medium and thick)
do
exist, they reside not 'in between' skinny and medium, but rather, below (or faster than) a skinny line.

 

As a result, we
rarely
see them. However, when we
do
see these faster (than skinny line) fractals, they operate in the
exact same
fashion as all other fractals (skinny, medium and thick) which we see each and every day.

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.