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.

UrmaBlume

This Morning's Trade

Recommended Posts

Because we feel that an indication of the direction of the next 20 - 50 points in ES is forming now we posted a report on this mornings activity. Here is an excerpt from that report:

 

Today's number of filings for state jobless benefits was 570,000 - bigger than the expected 550k

A measure of the services industry, ISM Services, will be released at 1000 EST

The Institute for Supply Management reported at 1000 a greater than expected

improvement in the US services sector

 

*****

 

The Nite Session found support at 993.00 and selling slightly above 1003.00

 

This screen capture of our HUD was taken 30 minutes before today's Open

 

 

090309hud1.jpg

 

This chart shows Trade in ES 45 minutes after the open.

Prices are down from the open but still between Nite Suppor and Nite Resistance

The ISM announcement enhances downward bias

 

 

090309rpt1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read in your previous posts that you commitment can sometimes can be defined as ticks that happen on the upside vs ticks that happen on the downside. How are you defining whether or not a trader is considered long term? Are these traders who are involved in the initial movement that occurs around an intensity spike?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  davewolfs said:
I've read in your previous posts that you commitment can sometimes can be defined as ticks that happen on the upside vs ticks that happen on the downside. How are you defining whether or not a trader is considered long term? Are these traders who are involved in the initial movement that occurs around an intensity spike?

 

Dave,

 

Thanks for the query.

 

We pay no attention to ticks. We pay attention to buy and sell volumes and classify them in several different ways. All of the trade in an intensity spike does not necessarily get added into what we call "longer term commitments by commercials."

 

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I might have misread some of your previous posts then.

 

So is trader commitment usually discovered during these intensity spikes and if it is, are you looking for orders or groups of orders that appear to be of a large size?

 

What would help constitute that a trade is considered long term vs non long term? Based on what you have said your roots started with MP, so does some of this tie into initiative and responsive traders who are making their movies inside our outside specific value areas?

 

I would have to assume, that the portion of the right of the HUD would represent some sort of buying/selling pressure for a given time period (i.e. overnight) based on the cumulative pressure that occurred during these different time frames.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Perhaps I might have misread some of your previous posts then.

 

So is trader commitment usually discovered during these intensity spikes and if it is, are you looking for orders or groups of orders that appear to be of a large size? intensity and commitment are not registered the same and for us, transaction size is not a consideration

 

What would help constitute that a trade is considered long term vs non long term? Based on what you have said your roots started with MP, so does some of this tie into initiative and responsive traders who are making their movies inside our outside specific value areas? whether it is intensity or balance of trade one of the issues with the profile graphic has always been that it can not be seen when it is inside the value area - no so with our gear"

 

I would have to assume, that the portion of the right of the HUD would represent some sort of buying/selling pressure for a given time period (i.e. overnight) based on the cumulative pressure that occurred during these different time frames. it is a bit more than that - it is the percentage of normal commitment for the period noted above and normalized for both bias and time of day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to congratulate UrmaBlume for providing useful information and discussion with other traders and thus withdraw my suspicions and comments about his motivations in posting on the board. For the record - I guess I apologize :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  UrmaBlume said:
"Perhaps I might have misread some of your previous posts then.

 

So is trader commitment usually discovered during these intensity spikes and if it is, are you looking for orders or groups of orders that appear to be of a large size? intensity and commitment are not registered the same and for us, transaction size is not a consideration

 

What would help constitute that a trade is considered long term vs non long term? Based on what you have said your roots started with MP, so does some of this tie into initiative and responsive traders who are making their movies inside our outside specific value areas? whether it is intensity or balance of trade one of the issues with the profile graphic has always been that it can not be seen when it is inside the value area - no so with our gear"

 

I would have to assume, that the portion of the right of the HUD would represent some sort of buying/selling pressure for a given time period (i.e. overnight) based on the cumulative pressure that occurred during these different time frames. it is a bit more than that - it is the percentage of normal commitment for the period noted above and normalized for both bias and time of day

 

Although subtle, your last point explains a lot and I appreciate your "commitment" ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  UrmaBlume said:
"Perhaps I might have misread some of your previous posts then.

 

So is trader commitment usually discovered during these intensity spikes and if it is, are you looking for orders or groups of orders that appear to be of a large size? intensity and commitment are not registered the same and for us, transaction size is not a consideration

 

What would help constitute that a trade is considered long term vs non long term? Based on what you have said your roots started with MP, so does some of this tie into initiative and responsive traders who are making their movies inside our outside specific value areas? whether it is intensity or balance of trade one of the issues with the profile graphic has always been that it can not be seen when it is inside the value area - no so with our gear"

 

I would have to assume, that the portion of the right of the HUD would represent some sort of buying/selling pressure for a given time period (i.e. overnight) based on the cumulative pressure that occurred during these different time frames. it is a bit more than that - it is the percentage of normal commitment for the period noted above and normalized for both bias and time of day

 

Just some other thoughts, you have mentioned that volume and size don't help in classifying the type of trader - how do you determine if a trader is long term or not? Are LDB reports part of the decision process?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • 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/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.