The Price / Volume Relationship

[patrader 10]

Today's ES.Comments welcome especially if accompanied by my chart with "arrows" on it.lol.Thanks

[Breakeven 10]

Can you talk about accelerating your pink traverse to a new pt3 @ 10/14 14:00? It seems necessary on my chart too, but I can't figure out what gives us the 'heads up' that a new traverse pt3 is on the table.

 

Well, first of all, I think you can safely ignore that last chart I posted. I was trying to illustrate something that just did not come out right. The "idea" behind that chart was flawed as well.

 

But I would be happy to give a rundown of This Chart which I believe to be the most accurate of my charts. But note that the exact ending points for some of the gaussians are probably a bit rough, especially on the morning of the 14th.

 

The idea behind the chart I just linked hinges on WWT (what wasn't that) and the FB-Lateral around mid-day on the 14th. I believe that lateral to be equal (the same fractal) to the thin Orange down container and worked backwards from there. Now, I could not decide if the morning of the 14th was Pt3 of a Tape or a Traverse, but I did know that an Up Tape and Down Tape followed my Lateral. So, all I have to do is decide what fractal the Orange thin line is and that will tell me what came before.

 

If that Orange container is a Tape, then the Lateral is a Tape and the Traverse Acc's there...and we get two orphan Tapes trailing after. So my thinking is that this can't be correct.

 

If that Orange container is a piece of a Tape (namely 2R) then the Lateral is also a piece (that follows what I think is Pace Acc) and I can Acc the Tape. Now I have one Down Tape (the Purple lines) followed by an Up Tape>Down Tape, this seems to work. Which means the afternoon of the 13th and the morning of the 14th are pieces of a Tape.

 

I know this probably seems an overly convoluted way to try to answer your question, but what I think would not have made sense without my perspective.

 

Can you talk about accelerating your pink traverse to a new pt3 @ 10/14 14:00?

 

Short answer for what I think:

 

There is not a new Pt3 for the Traverse at 14:00. It is the Pt3 for the Traverse.

 

 

Disclaimer: Please assume everything I say is incorrect, as it may very well be. It is very possible that I jumped fractals forwards and backwards, just ending where it seemed to work by chance.

 

I hope this helps more than it hurts.

[patrader 10]

Today's chart with lateral formations added.

[gucci 10]

Think in terms of tapes. Start with what is observable. To observe a traverse you need at least two tapes break each other, whereas the volume tells you whether those breaks are noteworthy or not.

 

I meant three tapes of course. I apologize for any confusion.

[vienna 10]

Thanks a lot, that helps!

 

Listen. You need to fight the urge to overcomplicate things. In the beginning stages of attempting to learn this material, everyone (including myself) tries to 'invent' different ways they 'feel' might best suite their needs, but the reality is, far different than one expects. You currently find yourself 'hung up' on vocabulary. Your prior educational experience dictates you need to understand vocabulary in order to understand a concept. This is true only in cases where vocabulary is the differentiating factor.

 

In this specific case the words "tape, traverse, channel, bbt, sub bbt sub-sub bbt (or however many fractals down the rabbit hole one wishes to travel)" have zero relevance to understanding. One could just as easily use "thin, medium, thick, dotted, dashed, dot-dashed" or even "pig, goat, cow, spider, insect, bateria" to describe the exact same events. You understand the "pig, goat, cow" analogy because you know the absolute definition of each organism. You therefore assume, using the same approach, all you need is to understand the absolute definition of "tape, traverse, channel or bbt," What the reality is you have yet to understand that the market often speaks in a language which (while sometimes providing absolutes) most frequently transfers information in a relative sense.

 

In other words, you should focus on when you have a completed container compared to when the market continues to build the same container. In such a fashion, you need not know what to call the container itself, but by applying the fractal nature of all markets, you can know when one container has ended, and another has begun.

 

- Spydertrader

[gucci 10]

Something to keep one going...

[moosie 10]

A significant amount of information exists with the creation of each and every Volume Bar. Similarly, the market provides far more information, with respect to Pace Changes, than just how 'non-dom sub tapes' present themselves.

 

I am sure that must be true, but I don't 'know' it yet. At my present level of annotation ability it is hard to see two periods that look the same in the price pane, have different volume arrangements, and have different outcomes.

 

 

How can you know if your statement resulted from accurate (or incorrect) information?

 

It is composed of a complete volume sequence and it's container breaks the previous container. Also, that part is now coming out the same each time I erase and start over with a refinement to my annotation technique. I am convinced that its there.

 

 

Context, always has been, and always will be, king. You cannot make decisions in a vacuum. VE's must always be handled in a consistant fashion. Fanning must always be handled in a consistant fashion. Pace changes must always be handled in a consistant fashion. Order of events must always be handled in a consistant fashion. Dominance and Non-dominance must always be handled in a consistant fashion.

 

I hear that. I do not yet understand non-ve fanning/acceleration or the impact of pace changes.

 

 

The current Traverse under discussion exists within a known entity called a channel. Annotate all components of the channel in a consistant fashion and you'll understand the answers you seek existed right in front of you all along.

r

 

Are you implying that consistency in annotation requires thorough differentiation? Makes sense to me.

 

I am currently attempting to why the black thick thing and the red thick thing are the same fractal. If I were to consistently apply the annotation method used up to 15:05, it would be a medium thing. The black thing does start on extreme volume; is that sufficient (in this particular context) to know that this container is on the thick fractal?

 

Thanks again for your time and commentary.

[Spydertrader 10]

I am currently attempting to why the black thick thing and the red thick thing are the same fractal. If I were to consistently apply the annotation method used up to 15:05, it would be a medium thing. The black thing does start on extreme volume; is that sufficient (in this particular context) to know that this container is on the thick fractal?

 

You have one more container to annotate in order to create a thick fractal (channel). You'll then have three medium weight containers to compare and contrast. If you complete the annotation process for a channel (thick container), you should see two very similar traverses and one different traverse. Determining why the two are similar vs why the one is different should then become easier for you.

 

- Spydertrader

[Ezzy 10]

You therefore assume, using the same approach, all you need is to understand the absolute definition of "tape, traverse, channel or bbt," What the reality is you have yet to understand that the market often speaks in a language which (while sometimes providing absolutes) most frequently transfers information in a relative sense.

 

Think in terms of tapes. Start with what is observable. To observe a traverse you need at least two tapes break each other, whereas the volume tells you whether those breaks are noteworthy or not.

 

I meant three tapes of course. I apologize for any confusion.

 

Not to confuse but thought it was worth mentioning, it's been said the smallest possible tape is 5 bars - though I can't remember seeing one personally. Food for thought on tape breaks and volume.

 

Probably should have said container instead of tape, but you get the idea. Sheep, goat, poodle.

[KalixMOR 10]

I have tryed a strategy in NT based on fast changes in volume coupled with price action but longterm backtesting yielded always no profit.

[Spydertrader 10]

I have tryed a strategy in NT based on fast changes in volume coupled with price action but longterm backtesting yielded always no profit.

 

Without the ability to accurately reflect market sentiment in a binary fashion, one cannot expect to locate a positive result from neither back testing nor walk forward analysis.

 

In addition, how fast (a gradient measurement) cannot override the market signals of 'change' or 'continue.' (binary measurement).

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

[cnms2 10]

FilterTip just brought back attention to a few informative posts Jack wrote in July.

[moosie 10]

You have one more container to annotate in order to create a thick fractal (channel). You'll then have three medium weight containers to compare and contrast. If you complete the annotation process for a channel (thick container), you should see two very similar traverses and one different traverse. Determining why the two are similar vs why the one is different should then become easier for you.

 

- Spydertrader

 

I think it must come down to starting volume, although the following table suggests vol@pt 2 as a possibility

 

Traverse #: vol @ pt1, pt2, pt3

1: medium, fast, medium

2: extreme, extreme, fast

3: extreme, extreme, extreme

 

 

The thick sequence is complete at the end of the third traverse, which is a VE of the thick container. There follows two more medium containers (annotated that way based on starting volume) before price escapes the thick container. Does that make any sense, or am I still mucking things up?

 

Thanks again; your commentary is very helpful.

[Spydertrader 10]

Does that make any sense, or am I still mucking things up?

 

Everything ends at 10:30. A whole new set of things begins at 10:30. Don't concern yourself with what you believe happens after 10:30, but remain focused on what happens between 2:15 and 10:30.

 

- Spydertrader

[ptunic 10]

Monday, November 1, 2010.

[gucci 10]

I think it must come down to starting volume, although the following table suggests vol@pt 2 as a possibility

 

Traverse #: vol @ pt1, pt2, pt3

1: medium, fast, medium

2: extreme, extreme, fast

3: extreme, extreme, extreme

 

 

This might provide some help. Note how important THOROUGH annotations can get sometimes . And Spyder has repeated that same thing again and again.

Edited November 3, 2010 by gucci

[moosie 10]

This might provide some help. Note how important THOROUGH annotations can get sometimes . And Spyder has repeated that same thing again and again.

 

Your arrows clockwise:

 

ibgs/ftt, bo of orange container on higher vol, ob, i have no idea

 

Why the orange container? Price doesn't ve the pink container (same as my med red) until after the pt 3 of the orange. What about the ob makes it say, "I am the pt 3 you are looking for."?

[gucci 10]

Your arrows clockwise:

 

ibgs/ftt, bo of orange container on higher vol, ob, i have no idea

 

Why the orange container? Price doesn't ve the pink container (same as my med red) until after the pt 3 of the orange. What about the ob makes it say, "I am the pt 3 you are looking for."?

 

 

 

Look at where 2B is, and what the price does at 2B.

 

As far as the orange container is concerned, try to draw the original pink rtl through

the points 1 and 3. I hope you'll succeed.

[zt379 10]

gucci

If I may ask, to see if I'm getting on the same page.

Would you agree with the remainder of the 15th from 10.30 onwards?

(the Blue/Magenta and Blue).

 

Many thx

Edited November 3, 2010 by zt379
missed of end of chart

[zt379 10]

gucci

If I may ask, to see if I'm getting on the same page.

Would you agree with the remainder of the 15th from 10.30 onwards?

(the Blue/Magenta and Blue).

 

Many thx

 

I've coloured the Traverse containers Magenta/Blue to be relative to each other.

This is for the purpose of creating a "thing".

A magenta thing and blue thing.

 

We know we have a Channel P1 at 10:30,

there for the Channel P2 (which would normally be at the end of the Blue container)

needs to be outside the previous down Channel RTL.

 

I've lost the carry over annotations so can't recall if the previous down Channel LTL VE'd

and if so then where that previous down Channel RTL is.

 

Regardless, if the end of the blue from 10:30 gets us to a Channel P2 that is

outside previous down channel RTL then fine.

If it does not then fine, because we then know the blue from 10:30 and magenta from 11:40 and last Blue from 14:05 are actually all faster things building the Blue.

Which would get us to Channel P2.

 

Hope that makes sense.

[gucci 10]

I've coloured the Traverse containers Magenta/Blue to be relative to each other.

This is for the purpose of creating a "thing".

A magenta thing and blue thing.

 

We know we have a Channel P1 at 10:30,

there for the Channel P2 (which would normally be at the end of the Blue container)

needs to be outside the previous down Channel RTL.

 

I've lost the carry over annotations so can't recall if the previous down Channel LTL VE'd

and if so then where that previous down Channel RTL is.

 

Regardless, if the end of the blue from 10:30 gets us to a Channel P2 that is

outside previous down channel RTL then fine.

If it does not then fine, because we then know the blue from 10:30 and magenta from 11:40 and last Blue from 14:05 are actually all faster things building the Blue.

Which would get us to Channel P2.

 

Hope that makes sense.

 

Isn't it nice? But you should annotate your ltl's as well because they are very important too.

[gucci 10]

This is a response to some specific questions asked by one of the users.

[moosie 10]

Look at where 2B is, and what the price does at 2B.

 

As far as the orange container is concerned, try to draw the original pink rtl through

the points 1 and 3. I hope you'll succeed.

 

Sorry, I must be missing your meaning. Our gaussians are different, as I put the 2b on the first ob of the container. Why would the 2nd ob be the (properly annotated) 2b?

 

Thanks for your help.

[zt379 10]

Sorry, I must be missing your meaning. Our gaussians are different, as I put the 2b on the first ob of the container. Why would the 2nd ob be the (properly annotated) 2b?

 

Thanks for your help.

 

moosie

This is my take if it helps..

(I stand corrected by those that know better)...

hth

[moosie 10]

Everything ends at 10:30. A whole new set of things begins at 10:30. Don't concern yourself with what you believe happens after 10:30, but remain focused on what happens between 2:15 and 10:30.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Thank you for the hint. When the smallest containers are made more carefully (widen for closes within the container, starting with the 9:15 bar), the gaussians are much clearer.

 

If the attached annotations are more correct, I still don't understand why the thick container is over and done with at the end of the third medium container. Is it that the ve's of the thick thing caused by the third medium container are at a higher volume than pt 2(thick)? Maybe reannotating the first medium with newfound care will show enough examples at the thin level for differentiation.