The Price / Volume Relationship

[ramora 10]

 

1) I want to see Time&Sales happy ticking off trades with sizes > 2,

you saw "2" in the T&S window -> you exited because volume isn't > 2.

 

2) Depth Of Market with pending orders above and below the last trade,

---There are ALWAYS 5 levels of pending orders above and below each trade. I'm not sure what you meant by that. Could you elaborate your points? TIA

My volume size > 2 refers to YM. ES would be a much larger number. My thought is to make sure that there are more buyers and sellers than just the small lot traders.

 

Looking at the Time and Sales attachment, it is impossible for me to determine if I would have entered based on T&S by itself. What is the Object, is the container complete, what is the context?

 

DepthOfMarket is 5 levels above and below, I am looking for a large number of 'patitent buyers' and 'patient sellers' and not just a few contracts trying to scalp in or out of a position.

 

In November at TradersExpo I had a learning breakthrough watching Spyder explain how he steps through a day bar by bar without using any sub-bar 'fine' tools. I am using the fine tools only at 'end points' as they mean very little in the center of a tape or channel. I has spent 'a lot' of time with fine tools before understanding tape,traverse,channel and object, container, context which are more important. You can make a mistake with the fine tools and still make money if you have the sequence correct. You can not make money if you have the fine tools and ignore the sequence.

 

Good trading.

[SK0 10]

Those definitions look very odd. I would expect:

 

velocity = price change / time

 

pace = no. of contracts traded / time

 

I concur with David about the definition though ramora gave a very good try to help see the nuances. I believe and hope I am correct that Jack talked about money velocity as the slope of a trading channel and categorized market pace into regions of volume per trading fractal bar. Damn, we have too many jargons to deal with already. Fortunately, there is no test for them.:frustrated:

[ptunic 10]

Re: Post #1467

 

In the attached there are two b2b2r2b sequences, one on 2/5, the other on 2/17. They both end in a signal for change, one with Jokari, the other with peaking volume and both with Pennant FBO. However, what came next in one case is totally different from the other.

 

1. Is this the matter of incorrect annotations? And 'something' indicates that the sequence for the non-dominant component of the slower down trend was completed in one case but not in the other?

 

I looked at this several times over the last week, I see one (imo) big difference that may or may not be responsible for the changed outcome. See attached chart:

 

On the 2/5 example, the lateral forms on Decreasing volume. On the 2/17 example, the lateral forms on Increasing volume.

 

Another (probably more minor difference) is on 2/5, the 1st bar of the lateral closes inside the previous bar. On the 2/17 example, the 1st bar of the lateral closes completely outside of the previous bar.

[romanus 10]

Re: Post #1467

 

 

 

I looked at this several times over the last week, I see one (imo) big difference that may or may not be responsible for the changed outcome. See attached chart:

 

On the 2/5 example, the lateral forms on Decreasing volume. On the 2/17 example, the lateral forms on Increasing volume.

It doesn't appear to me that comparing the peaks at FTT's and P2's yields any additional data that would make a difference between change and continuation.

 

 

Re: Post #1467

 

 

 

I looked at this several times over the last week, I see one (imo) big difference that may or may not be responsible for the changed outcome. See attached chart:

 

On the 2/5 example, the lateral forms on Decreasing volume. On the 2/17 example, the lateral forms on Increasing volume.

 

Another (probably more minor difference) is on 2/5, the 1st bar of the lateral closes inside the previous bar. On the 2/17 example, the 1st bar of the lateral closes completely outside of the previous bar.

 

Thank you for your response. It was determined that in one case the signal for change was and in another wasn't on the same trading 'fractal', and that rigorously constructing containers and gaussian lines based on the volume behavior inside those containers doesn't provide sufficient information to maintain fractal integrity. The context seems to be the missing variable. One would think that the solution would lie in being able to classify various contexts for the purposes of comparing and contrasting. However, that task doesn't seem to easily achievable, if at all. Attached is yet another (third) example of the sequence that looks like the previous two. One can say that the third context is the same as the first one based on how that sequence ended, but it obviously is not the same, based on what came before and after the sequence. In similar fashion, one can say that the third context is the same as the second one based on what came before and after the sequence, but it obviously is not the same, based on how that sequence ended. Therefore, it appears that we are dealing with three distinct contexts. It logically follows that context can not be a binary function.

[MKTr 10]

5 minute ES for 22 Feb 2010.

 

MK

[rs5 10]

Monday 22 February 2010

[ptunic 10]

Monday, Feb 22, 2010

[saturo 10]

1 day - 3 slightly different variations.

 

My vote goes to ptunic's version.

[ptunic 10]

Thx I have to say when I annotated today in real-time (or pseudo-real time, bar by bar walk-forward), I missed pretty much everything, I don't think I got more than 1 container correct. I thought it would be one of those days where even end of day it would be tough to put a complete (attempted) chart together, but luckily it started to fall into place.

 

Usually fanning and container acceleration (VE/NSW shifts) confuse me the most, as well as laterals, sub-fractals, and fractal jumping. I guess that's almost everything

[ramora 10]

Damn, we have too many jargons to deal with already.

Attached is a VolumePrice list of terms. Some are outdated, and some new terms are missing. Send me a message with missing terms and I will try and keep it up to date if it is helpful.

 

Good trading!

ramora

VolumePrice Lexicon.txt

[saturo 10]

but luckily it started to fall into place.

 

Strike the word luck from your vocab.

 

Daily volume has been steadily dropping the last few days... basically pace has been heading down below SLOW below before 11 AM and then stays there most of the day.

 

Slower pace means that the market is going to "spell out" all the faster fractal stuff and that can get confusing.

[Spydertrader 10]

Attached is a VolumePrice list of terms.

 

Thanks for the stroll down Memory Lane.

 

I haven't spoken (nor thought) many of those phrases in a number of years.

 

- Spydertrader

[Spydertrader 10]

[un]Fortunately, there is no test for them.:frustrated:

 

The market provides the ultimate test for confirming (or invalidating) any hypothesis. Ramora has provided a description of how he trades the market. You may interpret his words a number of ways. Test each way against what the market shows you each day. In such a fashion, everyone can arrive at the exact meaning of what has been described - without any confusion or ambiguity.

 

I say to you all again, the market provides crystal clear information on each and every five minute bar. The market provides this information in a binary fashion, at all times - without exception.

 

To those who have chosen to post their charts and receive feedback along the way, keep up the great work. You may not yet even realize it, but your efforts have moved you closer to the end of the road.

 

Good Trading to you all.

 

- Spydertrader

[dkm 10]

I say to you all again, the market provides crystal clear information on each and every five minute bar. The market provides this information in a binary fashion, at all times - without exception.

- Spydertrader

Crystal clear in terms of open, high, low, close and volume traded, I agree. But I fail to see how it is crystal clear what "fractal" the market is operating on and where we are in that fractal volume sequence. If this is what you mean by "crystal clear", then would you please give an example of how we are meant to see this?

 

Thank you

[ptunic 10]

I know this is a cop-out answer but imo there just isn't any 1 "holy grail" sentance, paragraph, or even 10 pages Spydertrader could post (well, maybe 200 pages ) that would fully answer this. If you look at some old threads on the previous website, Spydertrader many times went bar-by-bar and wrote 5 detailed sentences with multiple charts per bar explaining the context, mode, sequences etc (Romanus himself was a leading participant in these and did a great job asking questions and providing analysis as well).

 

I think this can be helpful, and at the end of the day it is binary (or deterministic, or crystal clear, or whatever you want to call it) but the caveat is there are dozens of factors with 10000s of combinations. But much like in chess if you learn how to use your bishop to pin the opposing king in one square, it translates to you easily able to learn similar ways to pin the opponent with other pieces and other squares. So one pattern really solves about 1000 combinations or more.

 

If Spydertrader went through this process, besides of course being exceedingly unpleasant for him and frustrating for many of us (remember the "pulling teeth" threads on an earlier site?), our rate of learning would just be too slow. Far faster to teach someone how to fish than throw them fish each day. Hense the emphasis on us looking at the process. What the lateral drill really is trying to show you is how to test your hypothesis by reviewing things that look kind of similar and notice subtle differences and if/when they consistently change the outcome. We can take the same lateral drill process and apply it to other laterals (non-conforming) for example.

 

In other words as nearly every successful trader (even of other methods than this) has told me, tremendous screen time and debrief is required. It's kind of like riding a bicycle in that respect, you can give someone a 50 page manual explaining physics or you can say get on the horse, yeah you will fall down at first, but you will learn how to ride faster than the person in the classroom.

 

I think it's kind of like a jigsaw puzzle, even though you are usually just making very tiny gains in your knowledge, that sometimes don't feel like huge victories, over time it starts to add up and the big sets of pieces start to fit in with each other. It is a war of many skirmishes (I guess like anything in life).

 

I also do think it is possible to learn this in a reasonable amount of time, as rs5 for example has demonstrated. I'm not sure her secret besides great focus + hard work but it is working

 

This is all just my opinion of course.

[cnms2 10]

I know this is a cop-out answer ... This is all just my opinion of course.

Your post is well intended, but unfortunately of no use to those who spent years of hard working unsuccessfully trying to profitably trade these methods. Obviously doing the same thing and expecting different results is ... insanity. Some kind of a better approach is needed.

[rs5 10]

Tuesday 23 February 2010

[rs5 10]

 

.......as rs5 for example has demonstrated.

 

 

LOL ptunic. I enjoyed reading your post with the analogy to chess and bicycle riding. But how did my name get in there??? Please know that I am still LEARNING! And as you can see in my charts, often confused! The proof of the pudding will come when I can translate charts to points on a consistent basis

Edited February 23, 2010 by rs5

[PointOne 10]

Could someone please walk through their MADA for the opening 7 bars of Tuesday 02/23 ES. (Needless to say, a brisk walkthrough by Spydertrader would be very welcome too.)

 

I'm especially interested in when you know to be short based on sequences (prior to or during the 10am* bar7).

 

Based on my understanding of gap adjustments, 09:45 bar4 made a new high and was not an obvious FTT of any container (it looks if anything like a P2), making 10am appear to be a FT3.

 

Now FT3's don't exist if you have correct sequences, hence my question.

 

Many thanks.

 

(* Bar open times.)

[PTVtrader 10]

Could someone please walk through their MADA for the opening 7 bars of Tuesday 02/23 ES. (Needless to say, a brisk walkthrough by Spydertrader would be very welcome too.)

 

I'm especially interested in when you know to be short based on sequences (prior to or during the 10am* bar7).

 

Based on my understanding of gap adjustments, 09:45 bar4 made a new high and was not an obvious FTT of any container (it looks if anything like a P2), making 10am appear to be a FT3.

 

Now FT3's don't exist if you have correct sequences, hence my question.

 

Many thanks.

 

(* Bar open times.)

 

How do you handle VE's on decreasing volume ?

[ehorn 10]

My view of the day...

[cnms2 10]

... the opening 7 bars of Tuesday 02/23 ES. (Needless to say, a brisk walkthrough by Spydertrader would be very welcome too.)

 

I'm especially interested in when you know to be short based on sequences (prior to or during the 10am* bar7)...

In my view, you have a complete sequence down starting bar 71 prev day (1520, open), followed by a complete sequence up starting bar 78 (1555, open). The up sequence ends with an FTT of the accelerated BBT (or whatever level of container) formed by the bars 3 and 4 of today (0940 and 0945, open), its pt 2 being Mon, and pt3 Tue.

[TIKITRADER 10]

In my view, you have a complete sequence down starting bar 71 prev day (1520, open), followed by a complete sequence up starting bar 78 (1555, open). The up sequence ends with an FTT of the accelerated BBT (or whatever level of container) formed by the bars 3 and 4 of today (0940 and 0945, open), its pt 2 being Mon, and pt3 Tue.

 

Yes , Spyder referenced to this elswhere . . .

 

"A Volume Sequence which began at 16:00 (previous day) Eastern Time ended at exactly 9:55 AM Eastern Time."

 

- Spydertrader

[MomentumMike 10]

Could someone please walk through their MADA for the opening 7 bars of Tuesday 02/23 ES.

 

I'm hoping that I have a sufficient understanding, after hundreds of hours of investigation, to contribute *something* of value to this thread. I'm also hoping that those more knowledgable will steer me in the right direction. Here goes (without using PRV)...

 

• Bar 1 - continuation from 2/22 of non-dom tape inside up-traverse
  
• Bar 2 - continuation from 2/22 of non-dom tape inside up-traverse
  
• Bar 3 - BO of non-dominant tape, FBO of up-traverse
  
• Bar 4 - VE of dominant tape and up-traverse on lower volume, all RTL's unaffected
  
• Bar 5 - completes downtrend BBT on significant volume - FTT - enter here
  
• Bar 6 - VE of non-dom tape hits RTL of carry-over up-channel to the tic
  
• Bar 7 - VE of tape and BO of both up-traverse and up-channel
  

 

I could be WAY off. My entry on bar 5 would have been awesome today, but many of my entries are :crap:. It was enheartening to see the up-channel RTL so clearly approached and broken on the expected volume, especially considering that it has been in place for many days. (Who wants to burst my bubble and tell me it was a fluke?)

[MomentumMike 10]

I wish I had a "Who's Who in JHM" book.

 

I'm over 500 pages into the Futures Journal and hoping that I can get a copy of Pr0crast's monthly review docs or any similar compendium. Many thanks to anybody who provides such material.