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

  Spydertrader said:
Then name the differences anything you like. Up / Down, Left / Right, Goat / Hedgehog or whatever other binary pattern suits you. The vocabulary isn't nearly as important as recognizing a subtle difference in the object itself (at this point in time). For example, the first example of a Lateral (today), moved in the opposite direction of the previous bar (Note, how I did not use Dominant nor Non-Dominant here). Whereas, yesterday's examples formed in the same direction as the previous bar (to the actual lateral). Clearly, such a thing would represent a subtle difference.

 

At some point in the future (once you do have a better handle on Order of Events), you can always change the vocabulary.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Spydertrader,

 

Do you mean the bar before bar 1 that starts the lateral? And if so, does it mean that this bar is important in the differentiation process?

 

--

innersky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:

Once you can see the various situations, you then focus on Order of Events (noting any differences from one situation to another). For example, the lateral which formed today beginning with the 11:10 Bar began at a completely different point along the continuum than 'Ezzy's Lateral.'

- Spydertrader

 

The lateral at 11:20 on the 26th Jan is post p3, so it must be the 2b portion of the b2b-2r-2b. "Ezzy's lateral", which I presume is the lateral beginning at 09:45 on the 25th Jan, contains the 2r-2b portion of the b2b-2r-2b sequence beginning at 16:05 on the 24th Jan. I personally cannot see the 2b portion on the ES 5 min but it would seem that the ym is sufficient to confirm that it exists.

20100126clip.jpg.e651a9027200efeeb013797938fddea2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  innersky said:

Do you mean the bar before bar 1 that starts the lateral?

 

Correct.

 

  innersky said:
And if so, does it mean that this bar is important in the differentiation process?

 

If one becomes confused when attempting to determine Dominant vs. Non-Dominant, I simply provided an alternative method for differentiating how a Lateral Forms. Otherwise, one need not even pay attention to it.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spyder - a basic question about the volume sequence that might benefit others as well:

 

Can volume sequences overlap? By this I mean can the 2R or 2B of a trend also play a "double" role by being part of the ensuing trend?

 

For example - this would mean that a 2R of an up trend is also "counted" as part of the R2R of the ensuing short.

 

If my question is unclear I will try to clarify with a picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  saturo said:
Can volume sequences overlap?

 

If you logically think this through, you'll realize you already know the answer to this question.

 

All trends overlap at the FTT (Point One). No Trends overlap at Point Two. Ocassionally, some trends overlap at Point Three (what Jack and Neoxx discused as "the golden triangle").

 

What Volume Sequences cause Price to move from Point One to an FTT?

 

What Volume sequences push Price from Point One to Point Two? To Point Three?

 

Once one arrives at an FTT of a specific fractal, then the non-stationary window (for that specific fractal) has closed. As such, 'sequences' are not shared in the fashion your question specifies.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  saturo said:
Spyder - a basic question about the volume sequence that might benefit others as well:

 

Can volume sequences overlap?

 

The answer that you are seeking is NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I included gaussians today. I am sure that I have jumped fractals in some cases, though through portions of the day it felt based on my traverses and trendlines that I was in sync.

 

By 'doing the work' I am learning a lot.

 

Apologize for jumping into the lateral posts and being off primary topic, but it helps me to have accountability by posting my charts :)

Thursday.thumb.jpg.baabfe14b8670c6c7b9bf37280aee3a7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  TheDon said:
I included gaussians today. :)

 

Attached, please find an over view of 'the bigger picture' as Volume moved Price from Point One to Point Two and from Point Two to Point Three. After reaching Point Three, Volume moved Price in the direction of the 'bigger picture' FTT (until we ran out of day).

 

All one need do now, is 'nest' the various faster (than the 'bigger picture') Gaussians within the Price and Volume Containers in an effort to learn what must always take place before a specific order of events has completed.

 

One can go as far down the rabbit hole as one wishes.

 

- Spydertrader

5aa70fb9eccd0_bigpicture.thumb.jpg.22a8005a4a250f24dc48bcfd8b294027.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dkm said:
The lateral at 11:20 on the 26th Jan is post p3, so it must be the 2b portion of the b2b-2r-2b. "Ezzy's lateral", which I presume is the lateral beginning at 09:45 on the 25th Jan, contains the 2r-2b portion of the b2b-2r-2b sequence beginning at 16:05 on the 24th Jan. I personally cannot see the 2b portion on the ES 5 min but it would seem that the ym is sufficient to confirm that it exists.
I don't understand what 2b can't you see (in your attachment ? in Ezzy's lateral ?), but I believe your conclusion is incorrect: you should be able to trade based on what you see only on the 5 minute ES chart, without relying on the YM 2 minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  cnms2 said:
I don't understand what 2b can't you see (in your attachment ? in Ezzy's lateral ?), but I believe your conclusion is incorrect: you should be able to trade based on what you see only on the 5 minute ES chart, without relying on the YM 2 minute.

 

"Ezzy's lateral" - 09:45 25th Jan. Spydertrader suggested that I look at the YM to assist with my difficulty to see the 2b on the ES.

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/34/price-volume-relationship-6320-124.html#post87581

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Spydertrader said:

One can go as far down the rabbit hole as one wishes.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Spy drill . . . or art ? ( Composizione, 1921 Serigrap by Piet Mondrian )

5aa70fba0b91d_SPY12810_1.thumb.jpg.ed7e3c24b667f22bac42b72d24519bc7.jpg

Edited by TIKITRADER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salutations All,

 

I've read the posts in this thread many times and I think/hope that I'm ready to join the discussion. I've decided to start by posting my view of the first day of the Channel Drill. (I hope that attempts to resolve this exercise are still welcome.) I found myself accelerating/decelerating TL's according to what I felt the Gaussians were telling me. So, the TL's aren't "clean". Heck, I'll be happy if concensus tells me I've identified the correct number of tapes. I'm very interested in anybody's view on my interpretation of the Gaussians, especially through laterals. TIA for any comments. And thanks to Spyder and all contributors for a thought-provoking mountain of material.

5aa70fbbd4e6d_ChannelDrill-Day1.jpg.7b8fe3ad61cc8d09d20a5aaed5f75a5c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  MomentumMike said:
I found myself accelerating/decelerating TL's according to what I felt the Gaussians were telling me.
I am somewhat intimately familiar with that particular day. And also, I was fortunate to receive some guidance on what subtle differences exist on that day. I believe that the attached reflects the order of events accurately.

5aa70fbc1ac06_7_14_2009(5Min).thumb.png.818885691d04d2770d44207493969b20.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Ezzy said:
Today's chart. Medium weight gaussians are building (inside) the medium weight traverses.
I wonder why the 1540-1555 can't be considered as b2b2r2b on some super-extra-fast level?

5aa70fbc694f7_ES01-29-2010.thumb.png.fcf803493ae41aa493c8ba45ad415307.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi romanus,

 

as a beginner may I ask you about this in your chart... "...the gaussian lines should ALWAYS match the trendlines..." (or maybe it was the other way around.). How does this workout in your chart?

 

Thanks.

5aa70fbc775ed_7_14_2009(5Min)Point123.thumb.png.8d86bf82f077b61c45f1759920cffc3d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  frenchfry said:
Hi romanus,

 

as a beginner may I ask you about this in your chart... "...the gaussian lines should ALWAYS match the trendlines..." (or maybe it was the other way around.). How does this workout in your chart?

 

Thanks.

In the chart that I posted for every line drawn in volume pane (gaussian) there exist a corresponding pair of lines (trendlines) drawn in price pane. The relationship between those two ( namely a pair of trendlines and gausisan line) can be described using the verb "match". Where do you see the contradiction between your premise ("...the gaussian lines should ALWAYS match the trendlines...") and what is drawn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this image is a lateral. This should be one that fits the the current topic.

 

Can the direction of this lateral exit be known with just the information shown ?

is there enough information here for . . .

 

1) Differentiation

 

2) Context

 

3) Order of events

 

 

This is for anyone who wants to answer any or all questions.

 

additionally . . . Spyder, could you just give a yes or no to each question here if possible ?

 

EDIT: All bars are finished, none are forming

5aa70fbca120e_latdrill1.jpg.c3b7d9e2e0f1e9987193c067ea726b3b.jpg

Edited by TIKITRADER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to take a stab at this.

 

I would say yes to 1) and 3) but No to 2). There is a lack of needed context here.

 

Is this already inside some other lateral? Is that at the beginning or ending of day which might affect the volume bars?

 

However if we know this is middle of day, not in the FOMC or other unusual event, and not inside a bigger lateral itself, in other words in normal context if there is such a thing, then I think this would be sufficient to know where it exits in both of these examples.

 

I will just tackle the 2nd one for now since I'm studying those right now. In that case, I think it is a Dominant lateral, with black being the dominant direction. I believe this would BO to end the lateral in the dominant direction (black).

 

Attached is what I believe is a similar lateral as your 2nd one. My example is jan 24, 13:05.

5aa70fbca8eab_jan_24_2010lateralsnipet1.PNG.403e276bf300169d8cc725651be85c39.PNG

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.