[dkm]

Originally Posted by Ezzy »

.... I might want to add an accelerated pt3 at 12:40 or so for the traverse......

Yes, an accelerated traverse is probably the correct thing to do but for some inexplicable reason I didn't do it. That may have an impact upon the position of the blue p2 since the high of the 14:50 bar would be outside the rtl of the accelerated magenta traverse. The 14:35 bar would subsequently become a fanned blue traverse p3.

[dkm]

Just realised. I didn't accelerate the magenta traverse because there was no VE. I think I am correct in saying that there needs to be a VE in order to accelerate a traverse.

[jbarnby]

Originally Posted by romanus »

IMO annotating the first two down tapes the way you did would result in a tape sequence (dom, non-dom and dom) creating a completed traverse sequence on tapes ( and consequently on medium thickness gaussians as well) at 10:05 OB. The first tape is drawn to decreasing volume bar. As such it has all three Points (1,2 & 3) on the same bar - Bar 1. Bar is an increasing volume bar which makes lower low. As such we must fan to accommodate it inside the original tape trendlines ( the way dkm did on his chart that he posted). The fanned out (decelerated tape - red on dkm's chart) has it's Point 3 on Bar 3. Drawing the tape from Bar 2 to Bar 3 the way you did would result in tape having it's Point 3 on Bar 3 and consequently two trends of different slope sharing the same Point 3. I don't believe this is a possibility.

Thanks for the posts Roman and David. One area in which I would like to see more discussion is fractals and their effect on sequences. For instance, in the down tape from 0935 on 07/21, how does one know we did not drop to a lower fractal? Because if 1040 is a 5 min (traverse) pt 3, the initial down tape must be a 5 min (fractal) tape. TIA

[TIKITRADER]

1) When differentiating each component of a traverse, would we find they are all equal, built of completed sequences ?

2) Are points 1, 2 and 3 on two bar tape sufficient for sequences complete to build a component ( one of the sequences ) that build a traverse ?

3 ) In the attached chart, are each of the sequences that build the red down traverse complete of all sequences of their own ?

[NYCMB]

Originally Posted by romanus »

IMO annotating the first two down tapes the way you did would result in a tape sequence (dom, non-dom and dom) creating a completed traverse sequence on tapes ( and consequently on medium thickness gaussians as well) at 10:05 OB. The first tape is drawn to decreasing volume bar. As such it has all three Points (1,2 & 3) on the same bar - Bar 1. Bar is an increasing volume bar which makes lower low. As such we must fan to accommodate it inside the original tape trendlines ( the way dkm did on his chart that he posted). The fanned out (decelerated tape - red on dkm's chart) has it's Point 3 on Bar 3. Drawing the tape from Bar 2 to Bar 3 the way you did would result in tape having it's Point 3 on Bar 3 and consequently two trends of different slope sharing the same Point 3. I don't believe this is a possibility.

Hi romanus,
I believe you posted a valuable message. However, I have problem to understand what you mean. Could you provide a chart with notes to explain your thoughts ? TIA

[NYCMB]

A clear attachment for post #205.

[Ezzy]

Originally Posted by dkm »

Just realised. I didn't accelerate the magenta traverse because there was no VE. I think I am correct in saying that there needs to be a VE in order to accelerate a traverse.

When we have a VE we almost always have or get an accelerated point 3. But not sure if the reverse applies, always needing the VE, as we could just FTT instead.

As I take another look it might be more of an acceleration of the tape which did have a VE, but the left to right movement (lateral tape) may not have everything required for a non-dom tape - so it wouldn't be an accelerated traverse. Not sure just another view to work through.

[dkm]

Originally Posted by jbarnby »

...One area in which I would like to see more discussion is fractals and their effect on sequences. For instance, in the down tape from 0935 on 07/21, how does one know we did not drop to a lower fractal? Because if 1040 is a 5 min (traverse) pt 3, the initial down tape must be a 5 min (fractal) tape. TIA

I may be wrong but I think the idea here is to consider tapes, traverses and channels as the ONLY fractals. By keeping to only 3 fractals we can hopefully avoid the confusion that came from the concept of "dropping a fractal".

On 07/21, we begin with a 2 bar tape from 0935 to 0940. The 0945 stitch bar ve's the tape with irv and allows us to fan the initial tape to the high of 0945 and clone the new rtl to the low of 0945. The next 3 bars all close inside our tape. We then get the OB at 1005 and we draw a new tape to the OB, giving us a steeper tape rtl. Until we get a close outside our tape rtl we have to consider all of this price movement since 0935 as "one tape" moving from p1 to p2 of our traverse. The 10:20 bar closes outside our tape and begins our new tape to the traverse p3.

If any of this is incorrect I am hoping that spyder will clarify.