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.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • City
  • Country
  • Gender

Trading Information

  • Vendor
  1. 1. I wasn't talking about prediction. If you annotate a B2B but then discover it wasn't, then your annotation was either of a probability, or a mistake. 2. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I wasn't talking about trading on a faster fractal. Since fractals are identical, the same situation can occur on the slower trading fractal.
  2. That's the approach I use, but it means you are dealing with probability (of a B2B in this case) until later confirmation or disconfirmation. Also, in this specific case it wouldn't cause a trading error if you are trading on a slower fractal. But since the same situation can occur on your trading fractal (fractals being identical), it can result in a error if/when it develops on the slower fractal.
  3. cunparis, I developed some things with the Zenfire API for a while when I was especially interested in the trade intensity stuff. In the end I decided it wasn't worth all the extra work (and I didn't get into charting etc). I found I could do everything needed via NT (gomi's work helped too). (fwiw)
  4. I assume that's Jack... Is this an indirect way of saying you disagree with Sypdertrader's comments above?
  5. - which makes your posts nothing to the power of two. Really, all you're doing is stifling discussion. Right or wrong, davewolfs was making a contribution. Your metacomments aren't.
  6. The bid is refreshed, absorbing the sellers without allowing price to move significantly lower. Surges in buying intensity at the bottom of a move do occur, but are much rarer. They probably represent increased urgency, rather than just taking advantage of a 'normal' imbalance. The indicator is more precise, but if you're looking for it you can basically read the same information from standard price-volume-velocity studies.
  7. The tradestation code already exists. You might try sending proflogic a pm.
  8. The time histogram can be quite close, and certainly a good trader / reader of charts can use it to 'see' pretty much the same activity. The 'trade intensity' indicator is obviously more precise at identifying the activity AgeKay speaks of, though it certainly isn't the 'grail' - what that activity means for future direction still has to be interpreted in context. Perhaps this is different on other instruments; I mostly trade the ES. I've been using the intensity indicator since last Fall, but only on a faster chart - on my slower volume bar charts I use a time histogram. I also use 2 different instances of the indicator, set at different 'speeds'. HTH
  9. Seems a very interesting project, if we'll be able to code in .Net. Will they also have millisecond timestamps for those UrmaBlumish calculations? Better yet, could you provide contact information for someone who could answer questions directly?
  10. Good point. From the standpoint of a short-term trader making directional bets, does it actually make any difference whether the observed spikes are directional or arbitrage? It seems to me what matters most is whether the spike represents resistance being taken out in a strong trend, or resistance stopping a trend.
  11. fwiw, that's identical to my chart - we can't both be wrong, can we?
  12. Thanks for the response. I should have phrased the question more precisely. How do we know, in real time, that the b2b2r2b sequence from 12:40 to 13:50 occurs on a faster fractal? - become
  13. I have a question regarding Thursday's ES chart, for anyone. How could we know that 13:50 wasn't the FTT ending the up channel? - become
  14. You are right about the r2r being a problem, but you don't see that you have a more consistent problem in the rest of the chart. As you know, the sequences are: r2r2b2r, and b2b2r2b. On the same fractal, they alternate. You have annotated an entire ES day with only one such correct sequence, and a partial sequence to end the day. What's going on in between? ehorn's chart of the same day contains nothing but those sequences, on 3-4 levels. I suggest you study his chart closely to see what he is seeing that you are not. What are the orange and blue dots in the volume pane? They seem to obscure the actual levels.... - become
  15. Romanus, I sympathize with your frustration (though I worry less about binary logic). As it happens, I went long on bar 2. If it will help, here's why. Bar 1 isn't peak volume, since the first bar of the day always has far more volume than the last 2 bars of the preceding day. (Your "P" is just marked by an algorithm, and I would drop it altogether, as it registers too many false positives, and misses some real Peaks.) The ibgs is a subfractal retrace that fails: increasing volume that fails to break the prior bar's low, and retreats substantially from its low. As far as sequences go, I expected to see increasing black to complete the sequence begun the day before, and we hadn't got it yet. So my analysis confirmed my expectations. I exited on the VE 2 bars later. I remain unconvinced about entering short because of a lower volume VE, just before an important news item - context tells us to expect a reduction in volume. If the news had been a substantial positive surprise, we would have had a big black bar, and would be seeing the preceding 2 bars as a lateral retrace. HTH - become
  • Create New...

Important Information

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