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.
cnms2
-
Content Count
341 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by cnms2
-
That is not a real example, so it's not useful. Try to look into actual market chart snippets, that are large enough to include at least an observable set of three sentiment moves, like in the example I posted. Maybe you can use Tams charts for this. Market is not random.
-
Unfortunately this discussion is marred by misunderstandings, as often happen on internet forums. I'll try to clarify my recent postings: - I don't use intraday degapping - I don't have software that does it - I didn't say that intraday deggaping is superior - I don't have data and an opinion to compare intraday degapping with non-degapping - my example above is the first example ever I used to compare a sequence of bars deggaped vs. non-degapped; in this randomly selected example, it seems to me that the degapped sequence identified more clearly the sentiment moves - my recollection is that the first time I read about intraday degapping, as about day-to-day degapping was from Spydertrader, and only later from Jack, but I don't know who actually invented it - my current impression, based on their latest posts, is that both Spydertrader and Jack currently use both type of de-gapping - I find that day-to-day degapping makes sense because RTH market has different characteristics than overnight market; and I believe this is the same justification supported by Jack; I don't recall Spydertrader's justification - I'm not aware of a justification for intraday degapping from anybody; if I were to guess, I'd say that it emphasizes more what's happening intrabar, putting all bars on the same footing; anyway, encapsulating the price in bars with OHLC points is a form of filtering an information that is by its nature continuous, so it is arbitrary and will always truncate out some data Anyway, people often make statements and argue without providing support for their opinion, while asking others to justify themselves, to invest time and effort for the requester benefit. It can't work.
-
A comparative example of a bar-2-bar degapped section vs. its regular charting. In this case the degapped annotation seems clearer.
-
I miss the times when people discussed various concrete aspects of the Hershey methods trying to improve their knowledge. Without Spydertrader ...
-
PTVtrader's chart and post of 10-11-2009 were in reply to the above comment made by Spydertrader. A clarification: I don't use intraday degapping.
-
First time I read this idea from Spydertrader, and I guess Jack took it from him, or as in other cases it might've been an older element of Jack's method uncovered by Spydertrader at a certain moment. Degapping (day to day, and maybe the intra-day too) makes sense especially for the continuity of the order of events, for volume sequences. There is the possibility that it may be useful for volume gating by price internals, and it might not be useful for trendlines. It might be also useful to determine if a VE closed in the zone, or if a lateral ended. If you try to use a concept you don't fully understand, it's likely that you'll use it incorrectly and you'll draw the wrong conclusions. You may have noticed that bar coloring (pennants) is slightly changed too.
-
You know how they say: "it's only a drill, if it were an actual" trading system it would also have the volume and the fractal context.
-
I think that Jack enjoys finding new ways of looking at the market, but as the market doesn't really change its basics, all the new approaches posted by Jack are just new ways of emphasizing one aspect or another, new observations, new ways of filtering and organizing the information, but they rely on the same basics. If we make a step back and look at the new way Jack posts about the market, he is actually just moving the emphasis toward the volume information, basically giving a bunch of new names to the peaks and troughs of the pattern, and dropping a fractal on the pt3 to ftt leg. Those names are another way of depicting the gaussians. PS: How many people in their 80s can still have such active minds?
-
Jack's Friday chart and logs.
-
So you know how to trade it if you trade on a faster fractal. By the way, ET deleted most of Jack's recent posts.
-
I'm not sure what's your point. Jack's charts show that: on his trading fractal, on 3-21 early in bar 75 he reversed short, to be on the right side of the market, sentiment short on 3-22 early in bar 1 he entered short, in accordance with the above, no new assessment at this point on 3-22 early in bar 5 he reversed long, to stay on the right side of the market, sentiment now being long The 54.2 looks like a typo for 44.2. The bar 5 on the chart is bar 6 in the log for the reversal long at 45. Jack's posts always had such inconsistencies, but they don't seem significant to me when I'm looking to the judgement behind the words. As an example consider Jokari vs. Johari, which he said he did on purpose. In this case bar 4 is an ftt, followed by a decreasing volume up black stitch. The "carved" reversal should've been early bar 5, then, later in bar 6 the "2nd chance" occurred. As a general note, I'm not defending Jack or Spydertrader, or trying to put one above the other, each one has his merits: we wouldn't have these discussions without either of them. I just post my opinions on a matter or another. I'm always open to learn something, be it something new, or correcting or improving my understanding.
-
The "channels" are annotations primarily made in the price pane. Jack's latest posts come from the position that the volume is the independent market variable, and the price (a volume dependent market variable) is used to gate / filter the volume information. Hence by monitoring the volume, as allowed by price, you can know at every moment the market sentiment, and stay on the right side of the market. This approach is easier to automate, but leaves more potential profit on the table.
-
I'm pretty sure that Jack introduced the three fractals, and that what we're seeing posted today by Jack includes collaborations with Spydertrader. Everything posted by both Jack and Spydertrader over the years is based on a few basic principles discovered many years ago by Jack Hershey (e.g. the PV relation, the pattern, the fractals).
-
The short sentiment ended on bar 4.
-
jack hershey Registered: Feb 2003 Posts: 7252 03-22-13 01:23 PM Monday open is long. P1 on bar 79 and T1 on bar 81.
-
jack hershey Registered: Feb 2003 Posts: 7249 03-21-13 02:19 PM As may be seen. we went short on a BM REV and have continued in this trend through the Assigned P1 to a T1, thence to bar 78 where the rule is "advance one peak" to P2. Bar 78 is usally high volume and high volatility. In this case a FBP followed and then the lat3 happened. At lat3 and beyond the Close is used to measure laterals. This makes bar 81 a lat4. We deduce, then that the market opens tomorrow on bar 1 with short sentiment. Three values of volume are inforce. No kills are inforce except that no more T1's are possible after a P2. When you wake up, your mind may be asking you curious questions if you followed along today.
-
See attached Jack Hershey's chart for today. Lately he's using a fully mechanical approach of staying on the right side of the market.
-
jack hersheyActive Member New PointOne said: ↑ Jack please would you clarify your: "A trend moves forward by measures (11) in the independent variable (you steer and focus from one to the next). these have "correspondences" to events (10) in the dependent variable which you hold through." ...and how these measures and events map to markets' R2RBR / B2BRB PV sequences (on 3 fractals)? Soon I will begin a trading journal. You show three independent variable elements in R2R B R. One each of these the sub has 3 also. # x # = 9. In the last sub, two more elements are possible (3 x 3) + 2. That is 11 for volume. The 10 cases of the dependent variable probably seem unimportant since the independent variable dictates the profit taking on price the dependent variable. BUT.......... There is an issue of the sequence of requirements to measure and just when measuring can be done. I feel the OP will explain how the neurobiology of the mind works at some point. As it stands now anyone can do anything they want and we know the consequences. And as you see my constantly lurking detractors show how envy combines with indignation which relly fucks up the mind function permanently. The dependent variable DOES HAVE a JOB. It gates and kills measurement in the independent variable. this is "entwining" of trend forwarding. There are five strands involved as it turns out. The important price cases are the only ones that make money. they "cast" shadows on subsequent price activity. SOOOO.... as a consequence (consequences are very important where a potential trader is focussed on "learning failure") (this may be explained as well by the OP), no measurement of trend forwrding is possible during the "shadowing" periods. Price squishes these out of the picture. An expert senses by three operators: space, shapes, and movement. So I have mathematically articulated 21 elements that cover the entwining of five streams of "stuff" I ask that people work to build their minds so that they have inference to use with the sensing operators. I wrote this out years ago in "Dr. Hu". There neurobiological "picture" of snsing and inference to obtain preception was introduced to the public formally at that time. Diagramatically you can see the iterative refinment positive feedback loops for becoming fully differentiated. Experience affords this fully differentiated spectrum.
-
I'm tempted to say that you're correct with your examples, in the way I understand what you wrote. Annotations usually are more clear than words, and marking in letters the significant points (pt1, pt2, pt3, ve, m1, m2, ftt) is very helpful. I also quote from today's Jack's posts, related to our current discussion:
-
Finer events will give more fake reversals with better entry points, while coarser events will give less fakes with less optimal entries. You'll have to decide what works for you. A volume increase gives momentum, and means continuation, so generally yields better reversals. Remember that this method works more with an "anticipation" mind set, than with a "confirmation" one. "The "2" happens in the area where the RTL is crossed, and except on the fastest fractals, in extreme pace situations, or news spikes, it should be preceded by observable decreasing volume and followed by increasing volume, on the fractal you're monitoring. On a lighter note, your question reminds of a dialogue from the movie "Michael"
-
If you look at the price pane interlocking fractals, look for FTTs. There are many ways to look at the price+pane picture that ultimately show the same thing. If you held through the pt2 to pt3 retrace, you should hold through the whole "fractal 4" snippet.
-
Sorry for the confusion. My statement about Jack's recent posts is not related to the annotations I made on river's charts. Those annotations represent my view, and are in response to river's request.
-
I believe that lately Jack posts trades based on his price / volume / end effects approach.
-
Admire Spydertrader's clarity in annotation, the first two steps of MADA!
-
On Friday, Jack posted his open for today, and he was right. Today he posted his open for tomorrow. Does your MADA agree with it?