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.
Spydertrader
-
Content Count
389 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Spydertrader
-
Since you work a 'day job' you might want to take a 'test drive' of Trade Navigator. The software has a 'playback' function which allows the learrning trader to view the market 'tic-by-tic' as it develops throughout the trading day, but viewed "Live" at the trader's convenience - instead of during live market hours. You should be able to obtain a free trial for these purposes. As far as your efforts go with respect to chart annotations, I have a few comments for you: Focus in on how Gaussians must operate, and how all the pieces fit together. Also, make sure your 'carryover' trend lines accurately reflect the current market dynamic. Lastly, with respect to your 'chart notes,' consider using a darker color - making your notes easier to read and easier for others to provide you feedback. I feel it very wise to set goals. Instead of a 'profit goal' (as most new traders set) you have chosen to set 'transference goals." Continue to do so in an effort to improve knowledge, skills and experience. Keep up the great work. - Spydertrader
-
According to mikeytrader, both Ireland and myself refuse to read books. In fact, the only trading book (if you can call it that) I have ever read was Reminiscences of a Stock Operator. If the word, 'Gaussians' bothers you (or the author of, "The Black Swan") then I recommend you call the lines goats. Goat herders aren't much for picking nits, so I don't think they will care. Good trading to you. - Spydertrader
-
I have the ability to determine continuation or change on any fractal annotated on my chart. I can trade using course level tools only (meaning just a 5 minute ES Chart), or I can bring 'finer level' tools into the equation (YM, Str - Squ, DOM and Tic Charts). I can 'jump' fractals, or choose not to do so maintaining fractal integrity across an entire day and / or multiple days, weeks, months or years. To you, each of the above represents an "unsubsubstantiated claim." To those who have seen me trade live, the above statements represent absolute fact. Were I to choose to attempt to alter your perception (from one viewpoint to another), you'd still not have the information required to do for yourself that which, for me, represents an activity no more complicated than taking water from a fountain. I have instead chosen to provide all the information ever required (contained within this very thread), so an individual who chooses to work purposefully, can, under their own power, learn to do that which I 'claim' can be done. As a result, I do not orient to an individuals 'belief system.' As such I can (quite easily) choose not to worry about 'proving' I can do what I 'claim.' I've left behind a roadmap. The vast majority of people choose to see the map as too complicated, or more than likely, never bother to look at the map in the first place. I'm quite content with such things. However the decision (to ignore or dismiss as valueless that which I have provided) must be owned by the individual making it. Believe my words have merit, or believe I am completely full of shit. I do not care which, nor do I have a stake in whichever choice the individual makes. All I ask is that people own their decisions. - Spydertrader
-
I could, quite easily, provide the information you requested, but without understanding the rationale for why a specific action takes place, transference cannot tke place. In other words, the information you have requested simply points out things can be done, rather than point out how things are done. The information contained within this thread points out a process for learning how to learn to M-A-D-A. More importantly, should the individual responsible for the trades I mentioned desire to share their success with others, then I'd expect them to step forward, rather than, have the information come from me. Good. Because, if i wanted to 'invent' a number, I'd have invented a much larger one. The dollar amount here isn't even important. As I have always said, staying on the 'right side' of the market matters far more than 'being right.' Again, knowing when someone placed a trade does not provide the how or the why they chose to place that specific trade. The process represents are far more important thing. My point (the reason why I mentioned these results in the first place) was to show (through a brief process of differentiation) how some individuals choose to see the world one way, when simply by changing one's orientation, the world reveals some incredible things. It isn't my system (nor Jack's nor anyone else who profits from it). The 'system' belongs to the market itself. I've simply tried to show how individuals can learn to see it for themselves - and through their own efforts. Ten Contracts, so if you do the math, that comes to about 44 points for the week (or just a bit less than 9 points per trading day) HTH. - Spydertrader
-
Oh, O.K. I guess since you are 'just wondering' about things, we should all come clean. You see, over the last five years, I've spent countless hours, building a worldwide conspiracy of individuals who have nothing better to do than invent incredibly unbelievable stories of amazing trading prowess. By last count, we have men and women stationed near the Black Sea and within the former Soviet Union, in and around financial centers throughout London, New York and Kuwait, across Australia and New Zealand and spanning many of the countries in Southeast Asia, in addition to having numerous agents embedded throughout Europe and across The United States. In short, any continent not completely covered in ice, and we have someone there spending their entire day posting on web sites for the sheer enjoyment of 'tricking people' into believing annotating 'pretty lines' on a Price and Volume Pane actually mean something. This vast, global conspiracy of individuals spends nights, weekends and every market day looking for unsuspecting neophytes of the trading world in an effort to recruit new members into 'the cult.' Strangely enough, the above fictitious scenario represents a far more believable environment to most people who represent the 'just wondering' crowd than when I say (factually), "I sat with a gentleman 2 weeks ago who captured $22,000 USD in 5 days, and he considered that amount a bad week due to the low volatility of the market." Some of the people you've 'disagreed' with in this thread already make nice coin. They just don't feel the need to prove it to you - or anyone else. Interestingly, most of the 'just wondering' crowd often mistakes the 'refusal to post proof' choice as 'failure to profit' rather than 'failure to care whether or not people believe they can profit.' It's a binary choice world. Pick which scenario appears most plausable to you and let the rest of the world make their own choices as well. I have always remained quite comforatable knowing a significant number of people who post on web sites believe my posts lack value. Hell, some have even suggested I am completely full of shit. I'm cool with all of that. You should be too. - Spydertrader
-
They are going to be at Las Vegas (the VP for sure, and possibly their CEO), and even though (at least) two individuals have strongly encouraged Genesis to add a 'Gap Elimination' Option to their software, additional interest for said functionality expressed through direct contact should prove beneficial. After all, The 'opening' gap isn't the only Gap which does not exist. More on this in Las Vegas. - Spydertrader
-
While many of the plans and agenda items continue to take shape with respect to The Las Vegas Traders Expo, I wanted to take a moment and ensure I have included all those individuals with an interest in attending. To date, I have 23 names .... sscott, ptunic, moz, innersky, rs5, ramora, double eagle, stepan7, gooch87, ehorn, icarus618, ph11l1p, yazdgatsby, stevecs314, treeline, ezzy, romanus, neoxx, Avi-8, Liz, Jack Hershey, Spydertrader, and Mikeytrader If, for whatever reason, you do not see your name on the list, but do have an interest in attending the event, kindly send me a PM via this web site, and I'll forward you some information. If, for whatever reason, you do see your name on the above list, but have not received an email or PM from me, please check your email inbox and / or your PM inbox. The information you seek, should be waiting for you. If, however, you have previously sent me a PM, but have yet to receive any information (after checking your email and PM), then, most likely, this is a result of me not having your email address. Kindly send me your email address, and I'll return the favor promptly. Some additional information .... We attempted to grab a large block of rooms at a reduced rate for the time period, but due to a very large 'Gamers Convention' being held in the Gaming Capital of the World, well, we understand the hotels / casinos know what side of their bread is buttered. :rofl: Anyhow, for those still looking for a place to stay within walking distance of The Expo and our event, The Excalibur and The Tropicana fit the bill nicely - as well as several other locations around the strip. You may want to stay within walking distance. With respect to our November 19th event, we still have a few additional details to iron out, but everyone should find the day both educational and entertaining. The day will (tentatively) last about 10 hours, and will include all the fun stuff from NYC. In terms of content, information pertinent to Equities Traders and Futures Traders will be included in both Jack and my presentations. I have also 'baked into the cake' plenty of time for Q and A. More details to follow ..... - Spydertrader
-
It's come to my attention that The Las Vegas Traders Expo has scheduled many of the Live Trading Sessions (Carter, Netto, The Pristine/FX Trader Challenge, etc. ) for Friday November 20, 2009. As a result, I'll reschedule our event for Thursday November 19, 2009 - in order to alleviate any possible conflicts. More updates to follow. - Spydertrader
-
The Las Vegas Traders Expo held at Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino runs November 18 - 21. I currently have plans to attend the event, and for those interested, I can plan another session - similar to the one held in NYC. However, unlike the NYC event, Jack Hershey plans on attending and presenting. I have tentatively scheduled time for Friday (November 20) morning, and have cleared the remainder of the day. Should enough people show an interest in attending, we can do the same thing as we did in NYC (presentations, lunch, drinks, etc.) In order to keep this thread on topic, anyone with an interest should send me a PM and include a contact email address (just like we did last time) in order to facilitate the exchange of information, and so I can provide additional details moving forward. Additional details as we move closer to November. - Spydertrader
-
The market (any market) exists as a result of a fundamental set of priciples. These priciples do not require interpretation of any kind. By creating chart boundaries in an effort to contain various trends which correspond to several levels of line thickness, a trader has the ability to monitor the market in an effort to note the exact point in time where / when one set of events has ended and the next set of events has commenced. This order of events exists irrespective of line thickness, fractal or time frame. While I clearly understand why some have difficulty in observing the phenomena described in the previous paragraph, cnms2 provides some excellent advice as to a few of the reasons for traders experiencing difficulty. Moreover, cnms2's post (which preceded yours in time) appears to accurately have anticipated your statement / observation / conclusion prior to its posting and provided you with a method for adjusting your current (and incorrect) viewpoint with respect to judgement vs rules. In short, cnms2's post directly applies to you (along with many others, no doubt. In the past, I have frequently provided direct answers to specific questions. However, more often than not, many felt my answers cryptic, murky, ambiguous or (worse yet) unresponsive. In order to remove any possible orientation to personality (rather than, people doing as they should and orient to facts) I have in this thread attempted to illustrate a process by which a trader can learn everything required to see that which exists and thereby differentiate that which does exist, from that which does not. Unfortuantely, some still insist on a personality orientation. However, for you specifically (and anyone else following along in general), you continue to miss a major component of Monitoring. Now, this doesn't make you a bad person, and questioning whether not the fundamental priciples I have described actually do exist, represents a very healthy excercise. But the time has come for you do determine why you have arrived at this specific conclusion of yours, and in determining the 'why' of the question, you'll no doubt, understand where (and how) your thinking went off the reservation causing you to reach an improper (one not supported by facts) conclusion. Remember, just because something seems to be a certain way, does not mean that the something is a certain way. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
DOM, as in DOMINANT (in contrast to NON-Dominant), and not, DOM as in Depth Of Market. An easy mistake to make considering the acronyms are the same. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
Considering the drawings (and the topic of the thread) represent what to look for on a Tic chart (or more specifically, the One Tic Range [OTR] chart), and not the DOM (aka Price Ladder), I doubt a genius level IQ is required. Attached, please find an OTR (Friday [EOD] 8-28-2009) from my display (Trade Navigator). The alternating Yellow and White sections represent a five minute bar. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
FYI. The Stretch / Squeeze portion of the 'hand drawn' 2 - pair shift in dominance is backwards for current market conditions - specifically where the drawing says, "Stretch - Neutral - Squeeze". The sketch (as drawn) represents the market when cash leads (See Premium) the futures, rather than, futures leading the cash (as is the current state of affairs). The rest of the drawing remains accurate. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
[site update] New Site Design Launched!
Spydertrader replied to Soultrader's topic in Announcements and Support
Nicely done (with resepct to the New Site Design). Not only does the new look provide a more professional 'feel', but the pages load noticeably faster as well. - Spydertrader -
While the event which you describe may indeed point to errors in annotation technique, in this specific example, no errors exist (with respect to the area under discussion). Either, you do not see something which provides the FTT or you do not see a contextual difference which indicates the possibility an environment exists which has the ability to obscure that which you expect to see. In order to understand which of the two applies to you, look for the exact same set of circumstances (moving forward) and (when located) operate from the standpoint that you (both) had an FTT (which you do not see) and did not have an FTT. When the market delivers the next set of events (which must come next), return to this specific example and note the similarities and differences between then and the future example. Once you complete this process you'll know which answer applies to you, but more importantly, you'll also know how to avoid a making the same error moving forward. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
Yes. - Spydertrader
-
Once the market has provided a complete set of sequences, then a trader can look for a change signal. The evidence you have referenced developed after the specific fractal reached the end of its run. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
As I indicated in this post, you need not refer back to other posts, threads or discussions. To that point, several people participate in this thread without ever having read anything posted on another web site. While their annotations have not been without error, they have improved significantly, with resepct to the accuracy of their trend lines and Gaussians, in a very short period of time. In addition, these same individuals have shown the ability to grasp concepts presented in this thread quite rapidly. Therefore, one might conclude that through the process of differentiation, a trader can learn all the necessary information as provided by the market. Romanus and PointOne held a very productive discussion not too long ago. Within that exchange, one can learn what sequence of events must develop at each 'Point' (1, 2 or 3). In other words, something must happen on one fractal in order to form the 'Point' (1, 2, or 3) of the next slower fractal above it. Armed with this knowledge, a trader should then be able to know the answer to your question. Did such a thing develop at the point in time (Bar 24) indicated? If not, then you know the answer to your question. If what the market requires did develop, then you also have an answer to your question. What is more, you can flat out take a random guess at the answer to your question. Based on that 'flat out random guess', the market needs to provide the next domino in the sequence. Did the market do so? If the market failed to provide the next domino required of the sequences, then your 'flat out random as hell guess' cannot possibly be correct. If a trader finds themself arriving at an incorrect answer, then take another guess, and test again the validity of the new answer. Once one locates the correct answer, then all that remains is learning to correctly apply that answer to the same scenario moving forward. For your specific question, you have already provided two possible answers. Allow me to add a possible third answer. One, the other or neither can be correct. Both (of your possible answers) cannot be correct. Certainly, you know what to expect next if the market says you have a Traverse, a tape or a channel annotated on your chart. Did what must come next develop (for each) or did it not? - Spydertrader
-
We describe a specific Price Bar as an 'I.B.G.S' (Intra-Bar Gaussian Shift) if said Price Bar takes on certain characterisitics (a 'lower low' than the previous Price Bar with the current Price Bar having a close above the current bar open or a 'higher high' than the previous Price Bar with the current Price Bar having a close below the current bar open). No need to focus on "how many tics" seperate the open from the close. At one time, we described the the "one tic IBGS" as an 'If1' bar (back when the discussions focused on Intra-Bar Trading). Since a beginning trader executes all actions at the end of a bar, such distinctions for "how many tics seperate the open from the close" of a particular type of I.B.G.S. Bar, no longer apply. As to whether or not an I.B.G.S. on increasing Volume does or does not terminate a lateral, you should annotate your chart both ways. One where the lateral ends, and the other, where it does not end, but continues onward. In each case, the market must then provide the next set of sequences. Does it? In such a fashion can everyone arrive at the correct answer as provided by the market itself. If you believe the orange line represents a traverse, what must the market provide next? Did the market provide it? If you believe the orange line represents a tape, what must the market provide next? Did the market provide it? Once you can see the next thing in the sequence, then you can learn to know in advance by applying your answer onto all other areas of a chart. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
Yes, we certainly do. We also know the date and time said up channel ended as well. - Spydertrader
-
See post by cnms2 above .. - Spydertrader
-
A trader can easily learn to differentiate the various tapes, traverses and channels formed by the market, as well as the sequences of Price and Volume which landmark these specific events, by starting with a known entity - one which exhibits certainty as defined by the market itself. Beginning with 10:10 AM on 7-13-2009, and continuing through until 15:30 PM on 8-5-2009 the market has provided just such an event. In addition, beginning with the very same 15:30 PM Bar on 8-5-2009, move forward until 13:30 PM on 8-11-2009 in order to see the exact same event, but in the opposite direction. This Channel Drill requires the trader to construct their charts in such a fashion that one knows with 100% certainty the end has arrived for both entities described above. Whatever solution works for one part of a chart, must work for all charts in the time frames mentioned. Two possible outcomes exist. 1. A trader accurately (and more importantly consistantly) annotates a chart and arrives at the correct outcome. 2. A trader uses "what works for them" and does not arrive at the correct outcome. In either case, the market has provided everything required to arrive at the correct endpoint in both scenarios. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
If you have the correct view on your chart, what must the market create next? If you do not have the correct view on your chart, what do you expect to see from the market? The Gaussians provide the answers to all of your questions. Annotating a chart without Gaussians is like trying to watch a movie with your eyes closed. Sure you might be able to listen in and follow along for a while, but you'll definitiely lose the plot before you run out of popcorn. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
I'm not really sure I understand your question. I agree the 13:30 [close of] ES Bar ends the down sequence. You appear to have that correct. However, I don't see how the market "proved you wrong" today. Perhaps, you've viewed today (08-12-2009) incorrectly, rather than, viewing yesterday (08-11-2009) incorrectly. HTH. - Spydertrader
-
Either I randomly picked 7/13/2009 as a starting point (up to and including present day), or the market provided something quite important during this period of time. Care to guess which? :helloooo: :D :D - Spydertrader