[frenchfry]

This is what I can see so far:

- The first lateral is in the dominant direction of that blue channel. If it breaks out with rising black volume in the dominant direction, the trend should continue. If not then it will go down?

- The second goes in the non-dominant direction. It breaks out in the dominant direction. But probably volume would have told me that it is not yet finished (traveling from pt 2 to pt 3?).

- The third one starts with an IBGS bar or outside bar and then continues in the dominant direction. On the break out in the dominant direction black volume should increase?

How are they the same? Maybe: They are all laterals?
They all contain hitches. But don't ask me what it means.

Even though this is all I can see so far, this is still more than what I could see before Vegas. Therefore big thanks to Todd and greetings to everybody else.

[TIKITRADER]

Spy Drill . . . keeping it simple

[TIKITRADER]

Originally Posted by SK0 »

I cannot follow what you mean here. Could you expand? Thanks.

yes, no problem. I will answer you today I have to step out this morning.

[become]

Originally Posted by Spydertrader »

As a follow up to our Las Vegas Meeting, I will (from time to time) post a drill (or a chart section) chosen specificaly for its ability to illuminate the current environment.


...

The above drill focuses only those Lateral Formations Highlighted in Blue. Done properly, this drill will point out a few items many have overlooked.

Good Trading to you all.

- Spydertrader

They don't look at all 'the same' to me. But to clarify, do you mean only the differences visible in this snippet as posted (that is, differentiation based only on price action, without reference to either volume or time of day)?

- become

[ramora]

Spyder Drill Differentiation:

1st examine the object:
Laterals without volume data I would say are equal - no bias.

2nd examine the container:
Lateral 1 part of a faster dominant tape. - bias higher
Lateral 2 & 3 are in a traverse from the dominant channel - bias higher
Third lateral is after a pt2 has been closed above the second lateral - bias higher

3rd examine the context
Time of day etc - no bias
Up gap from previous day - bias higher

[MKTr]

Response to Spyder's Drill on Lat Form Differentiation:

1. Keeping it simple: the Lateral Formations are differentiated according to where they form with regard to the PV sequence.

2. Differences:
a. Lat #1: Bar #1 formed pt2. At bar #3 we had pt2 needing pt3.
b. Lat #2: Formed after pt3 and completed the sequence.
c. Lat #3: Bar #1 formed pt3 and we completed the L1 sequence.

3. Information (what to anticipate):
a. Lat #1: Anticipate a BO up to form a pt3 and complete the sequence.
b. Lat #2: Consider the Lat as potential Signal for Change
c. Lat #3: Potential SFC on L1 but would also have to complete the L2. Since we didn’t have a L2 pt3, we would anticipate that the Lat would provide the L2 pt3 (i.e. BO up).

4. What Did Come Next:
a. Lat #1: BO up.
b. Lat #2: SFC occurred, taped ended, Lat contained pt1 of new tape.
c. Lat #3: BO up providing L2 pt3.

5. What I learned: I had been attempting to view Lateral Formations with regard to the first bar that forms them. I believe I now see them (but need more observation) more accurately (better differentiated) as a sideways (with subtle but key vertical pieces) component to sequence completion - more wholistic.

MKTr

[innersky]

Originally Posted by Spydertrader »

As a follow up to our Las Vegas Meeting, I will (from time to time) post a drill (or a chart section) chosen specificaly for its ability to illuminate the current environment.

Attached, please find a Differentiation Drill which focuses on Lateral Formations. At first glance, many will see these three examples (highlighted in blue) as exactly the same and without difference. Feel free to work within this thread, offline, in small groups, in large groups or all by your lonesome - whatever way you feel best suites your needs.

1. Do not overcomplicate.

2. Do not overcomplicate.

3. Do not overcomplicate.

4. Locate the subtle (or not so subtle) differences.

5. Determine what (if any) information the market provides based on these differences.

6. Note what the market provided next.

7. In the future, when 'seeing' a repeat of one of these examples, compare the outcome.

8. Note what (if anything) you learned from the process.

9. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

10. Do not overcomplicate.

The above drill focuses only those Lateral Formations Highlighted in Blue. Done properly, this drill will point out a few items many have overlooked.

Good Trading to you all.

- Spydertrader

The first lateral looks like a classic non dominant lateral. Price exits on increasing dominant volume. I only wonder if the sym pennant has to be red instead of black?
The second lateral starts the same, but the sequence completes inside the lateral, after having a VE.
The third lateral starts at pt3, and I think this one can be ignored as it's a dominant lateral.

In other words, the first one sits between pt2 and pt3,
the second one between pt2 and the FTT,
the third one between pt3 and the FTT.

--
innersky

[double eagle]

Here is my stab at it. These are some questions I asked myself when looking at the chart. The answers (ramblings) are a reflection of my current level of understanding and hopefully don't confuse others.

Q1: How could the laterals have been anticipated?
lateral 1: Volume accelerated to the highest volume of the day creating a peak. A lateral should be anticipated. On top of that this occured at 4:00 pm and the next bars usually have a volume drop off which would further make one anticipate that there wouldn't be enough volume to continue translating.
lateral 2: Pace jumped to extreme levels after volume drop from the market open. Anticipate a lateral as volume continues to drop off.
lateral 3: Pace accelerated creating a wide ranging OB, but the bar closed inside the previous bar. Anticipate more lateral movement with volume continuing to drop off.

Q2: Where are we in the tape/traverse sequence?
lateral 1: This is the third tape of the traverse (after pt. 3). The lateral is entered as we search for pt. 2 of the tape. This tape is later accelerated after pt. 3.
lateral 2: The original traverse is VEed. This lateral is part of the non-dominant tape that occurs after the VE. An accelerated traverse is being created. The lateral is entered after the pt. 3 of the tape.
lateral 3: This lateral ocurrs on the third tape of the accelerated traverse. The lateral is entered as we search for pt. 3 of the tape.

Q3: Can tape level change occur within the lateral?
lateral 1: No. We haven't reached the tape pt. 3 yet.
lateral 2: Yes. The tape pt. 3 has already been reached.
lateral 3: No. We are still moving laterally, looking for a return to dominance to confirm a tape pt. 3.

Q4: Is this a dominant or non-dominant lateral?
At my present level of understanding, I see non-dominant laterals as ones that create pt. 2 to pt. 3 movement. I see dominant laterals as ones that create pt. 1 to pt. 2 movement or post pt. 3 movement.. Hopefully this terminology doesn't contradict the working definition layed out in this thread and what was presented in Vegas.

lateral 1: The first bar made a HH in the dominant tape direction. However, it did it on volume that peaked with an acceleration of the gaussian slope. Therefore, I view this lateral as beginning with a signal for change on the sub-fractal level which creates pt. 2 on the tape level. I view this as a non-dominant lateral which creates pt. 2 to pt. 3 movement. Anticipate a BO up and into the trend post tape pt. 3.
lateral 2: The first bar made a LL in the dominant tape direction post tape pt. 3. I view this as a dominant lateral that can have a tape level signal for change in it.
lateral 3: The first bar was an OB on increasing volume. However, it closed back inside the previous bar. Price hadn't finished moving laterally. I view this as a non-dominant lateral that continues the tape level pt. 2 to pt. 3 movement. Anticipate a BO up and into the trend which creates a tape pt. 3.

Q5: What does volume tell us inside each lateral?
lateral 1: decreasing non-dominant volume, followed by increasing dominant volume that takes us out of lateral. This is what is anticipated. I assume that there is a complete non-observalbe (on the ES 5min.) sub-fractal r2r2b2r within the lateral that gives us the 2r of the tape volume sequence. I know the sub-fractal sequence has completed once there is a return to dominant volume within the lateral.
lateral 2: The 1st bar was followed by decreasing non-dom volume. The fourth bar was a return to dominant red volume. However, the bar FBOed the EH signalling change within the lateral. I view this as the accelerated tape r2r2b2r completing in the lateral. Next, increasing red turned to increasing black (change in dominance) and the accelerated tape was BOed. Therefore, volume telegraphed a tape level change within the lateral.
lateral 3: decreasing non-dominant volume followed by increasing dominant volume that takes us out of the lateral. The sub-fractal r2r2b2r though not observable, must have completed with the return to dominant black volume.

Q6: What role do the VEs seen on the first bars play in the laterals?
lateral 1: the sub-fractal trend VEed on the first bar of the lateral. The non-dominate and then dominate sub-fractal movement following the VE can be unobservable on the ES 5min.
lateral 2: The down tape was VEed on the first bar of the lateral. I anticipate non-dominate then dominate movement. This accelerated tape movement completed with the EH FBO on increasing volume.
lateral 3: N/A