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.

trader273

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    367

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by trader273

  1. Posted

    I like to think of bars with long wicks in a down move around a support area as more a drying up of selling pressure and not necessarily a large influx of new buyers.

     

    Otherwise why is there such a large move down from the previous close.

     

    Obviously there was buyers above, but there was still too many sellers to be absorbed till it went lower. It then stopped going much lower once enough weak hands capitulated and got out.

     

    Once the move started back up more buyers and short coverers came in and less sellers were inclined to get out or potential new short sellers deciding to wait for a better entry point.

     

    Vice versa in other direction, naturally.

     

    I dont think its possible to tell if the long shadow after a move is either buyers drying up or sellers coming in. I think that is what the guys over in the VSA thread are trying to do, but they post everything in hindsight and some see entirely different things on the same bar. Many have shown time after time in the CC that simple analysis is all that is needed.

  3. Posted

     

    Also, how about OEC fixing their risk parameters to allow stop and target brackets when an order has been filled.

     

    If a customer is close to margin, the OEC platform "might" accept the order, but reject the bracket (stop and/or target) when filled.

     

    This leaves both OEC and the customer at greater risk. Think about it.

     

    -fs

     

    I dont think I even want to know how you figured this one out. :eek:

  4. Posted

    Well I said earlier that if these new highs were rejected I would be looking for a short, and here we are:

    a4q0q1.png

    Heating oil also developed the same type of price action:

    156e1bo.png

    And Natural Gas also showed the same:

    112ed6e.png

    I think that all the markets are showing that the new highs, as of right now, are not sustainable.

  7. Posted

    Have to say as we are up close to Resistance short is the only trade that makes sense from an R:R point of view. The only thing I don't like is that there has not been better price rejection. A couple of nice long upper wicks is more comfortable to me (not that I trade the daily).

     

    I guess it all comes down to how you are viewing the Support and Resistance. If viewing only on a daily it would appear that there are not many upper shadows, but if you view it in a context of daily and weekly, you will see that sellers are apparently at this level.

    34tbabr.png

  8. Posted

    That is one ugly looking daily chart. I do not think traditional CSA ( candlestick analysis- hey, everyone has abbreviations for their stuff, why not us. I hope the VSA dont get too mad though:hmmmm:) works well on market like that.

  12. Posted

    In this thread http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/104/crude-oil-march-20-a-3631-3.html#post33729

     

    I showed that after the move up in crude, a trader should not be surprised to see a move back to the middle of the candle. That level was 107.70. Plotting that level and going to a 15 min chart, you get the following:

    5ue1w8.png

     

    Just some simple analysis can yield some nice profits. Of course there is much more to consider. Such as:

    • Where and How to Enter
    • Where to put a protective stop
    • Where to take profits
    • How close to Support/Resistance does price need to come

  16. Posted

    Watch that "smaller timeframe" talk. :)

     

    Question: given your take on the nature of the activity at support, did you go long at 11:00?

     

    What the hell do you think you are doing HERE DB:confused:. This is for people who only, and I repeat, only use candlesticks. I have seen your charts and you use bar charts, how dare you!?!?! This is the "Candlestick Corner". First you are out to destroy the VSA thread, but luckily Eiger is there to keep you in check. Now I see you over here? I know what you are up to :security:. Don't try to derail this thread either. We do not need anyone's view point but our own. We don't want to share ideas with other people unless they have the same ideas we do. What do you think this is, an open forum where people are free to express there opinions and thoughts?? I don't think so.

     

     

    DB, I hope you see the sarcasm in this reply. It is in no way serious. We welcome everyone over hear that the candlestick corner. I just find it amazing that some people feel it is there job to try and control a thread or topic for whatever reason.

     

    So hopefully you'll enjoy your stay and feel free to post whatver you want. God forbid, we might learn something new.

  18. Posted

    I usually treat scaling in and out as each separate trades so keep things simple. If I get in at $10 with 900 shares, then scale out 300 (trade 1) at $11, then another 300 at $12 (trade 2), and so on.

     

    Well if something like that works for you that is great. However, whenever I have run a test of piecing out vs all out, the scaling out has never come out ahead. It always seemed that I would take less on the winners ( since scaling out lowers your average when compared to getting all out). Like your example here. Your average profit is 1.5 instead of 2 if you got all out at 12. But when stops occurred, it was for my full lot. Just doesnt make sense to me that I would be willing to take a full loss on my full lot, all the while taking less on my winners. Maybe it was just me though. Every trader has their own way.

  20. Posted

    I think that there needs to be a "Realism" factor in this ratio. Anyone can say they want to risk 1 to make 10, but how realistic is that you are going to make ten before losing 1? If you can consistently stay about 1, and depending on your trading costs, you can go around 50% and break-even. Being more realistic, you would probably have to go around 55-60%.

     

    Then the question becomes how do you quantify this throughout the day. Do you keep a constant 1:1.5 ratio? So either you have a fixed profit in mind and your stop will be based on that, or your profit objective will be based of your stop. Either way, you will be hard pressed to remain consistent. What I mean is, some trades will require smaller stops which means smaller profit objectives ( if you are staying at a constant 1:1.5). Now a problem will arise if you take your profitable trades on the smaller profit objectives, but take your losses on the larger stop/profit objective trades.

     

    Some trades might say, well no matter what I'll have a 2 point stop and a 4 point target. This might work for some, but without using market structure to figure profit objectives and stops, I believe you will find yourself frustrated with the amount of stop outs.

     

    I am not suggesting that money and risk management isn't key in successful day trading, I just do not believe the risk-reward ratio is as important as everyone makes it out to be. It looks good on paper, but in practice it can be hard to maintain.

  22. Posted

    No it does not look to pretty for longs right now. However, that monthly high, looks like 110 could become a very important level. I could see a test up to those highs, now what its going to do there is left to people with a crystal ball. So I would wait to see if they take up to test the highs or bring it back down to the previous support level.

  23. Posted

    Actually when you define patterns rigorously enough for a script to detect they are anything but random.

     

    Actually doing this is the main reason that anyone that has ever doing back testing via script, finds that they fail miserable. Since candle patterns are more of an art form than science, trying to code them will be a daunting task. Here's and example:

     

    Script Rules for a Hammer:

     

    1) Upper Shadow no more than 1 tick

    2) Lower shadow at least 2* the real body

    3) Real body no greater than the previous 3 candles.

     

    Seems easy and logical enough. So you run your test and see that it fails miserable. Then you dive a little deeper and see that the program "missed" some patterns. Some of these hammers might of had an upper shadow of 2 ticks, or a lower shadow of 1.89 of the real body. But since you put this constraints on, your program couldn't find them. These strict rules, and trying to find a program that can find them, is the lazy mans way of trading. One needs to spend hundreds upon hundreds of hours of screen time to be able to use candles effectively. Having a program point some out here and there, while might help a little, will do little in the long run. You will spend more time tinkering with the code then studying what you should be. Believe me, I know! I tried to do this.

     

    I do not get why people do not understand that the shape of the candle, while important, is not the end all and be all. The overall technical picture is what is important. If price comes down to what you have defined as a support level, and there is a hammer or a spinning top, one should think about going long. There is no need to put these constraints on. What should be defined rigorously is your support/resistance levels or whatever a trader is using on conjunction with candles. The key word is conjunction. Candles are not a trading system.

     

    Candles were never meant to be used as a part of some black-box or gray box system. They are a tool of the discretionary trader. One must come to realize that. To be able to program candles and do it effectively and profitably is a pipe dream. If you want to use candles, get in front of the screen and study. And when you think you got it, study some more.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept