This thread could also be titled :
The slow group needs help from the smart group 
We need help shrinking / resolving inconsistencies between
1
VSA (Williams book, TG, and purists’ commentary, et al) and
2 Wycoff purists and
3 SMI and
4 DbPhoenix work
Step 1 Order of analysis ?? (First you look at _____, then you check ___, etc)
VSA ??
Wycoff purists ??
SMI ??
DbPhoenix ??
help!
Step 2 Terminology ???
Example: Here’s one way I am currently shrinking / resolving any inconsistencies between
VSA (book and purists’ commentary) and the other approaches. Whenever I read or infer the terms ‘professionals’ or ‘smart money’, I substitute the word ‘size’ – particularly in any
VSA content. An example from MTMv3, I would read “…markets move because of the effect of professional accumulation or distribution. If a market is not supported by professional activity, it will not go very far… ” (pg 39 pdf) as “…markets move because of the effects of size accumulating or distributing. If a market is not supported by size, it will not go very far…"
need help making other differentiations and distinctions where terminology may be impeded our understanding of these various volume approaches.
Step 3 Stability Context ???
(continuing from Step 2... "go very far…") ... And, yes, size needs to be smart or it won’t stay ‘size’ for long - but that’s not the point. Neither is it the point that size, to be effective / create results, may need to be size ‘known to be in the know’ (ie ‘professionals’). The point is that at and during the occurrence of all these Wycoff and
VSA based volume dynamics / patterns, the market is not in a place of precarium (where a single car could trigger a bifurcation). Size participates in high volume wide range, etc and either size participates in tests or no test even occurs, etc. And size is intrinsic to the whole prerequisite process where a ‘crossing the stream’ can occur, etc
Db’s volume dynamics / patterns / processes are a slightly different animal. Db’s processes / volume indicators (that oughta wake him up! just zinging you buddy
Just a tiny bit more seriously, I hope it will elicit new contructs or perspectives or ways of describing it from you) form in a more local context at pre-selected potential SR and are much less dependent than Wycoff or
VSA patterns on a broad sequence of activity and its ‘correct’ result on the chart (ie on a background formed by many ‘bars’).
i.e. Although size has dominated at least some occasions in the formation of an SR zone (or line, etc), his work does not require the same background / size setup / footprint as
VSA setups His triggers generally occur in more routine market conditions that are actually closer to instability but it is still less likely a single car could trigger a bifurcation.
(and, also, the order of analysis may be quite different from the
VSA contexts – comments anyone?)
A step closer to precarium …
Then there are those more rare moments / dynamics / processes when a single car could and does trigger instability and in these conditions, size will often contribute to / exacerbate the sudden instability by ‘gettin the ‘#vck’ out of the way
Step 4 Pattern size / Number of bars needed to form a gestalt ???? help!
Step 5 ???? help!
Step 6 ???? help!
....
Please offer your additions, perspectives, fill in the blank areas, and make corrections where content is 'out to lunch' to help clarify the differences between these 'volume' approaches.
Thanks