[Spydertrader]

Originally Posted by ljyoung »

For the purposes of this discussion, you have simplified matters by gathering all of these non-traverse fractals into a single fractal which is called 'the tape'.

One cannot 'gather together' that which does not exist.

While certainly, additional trading fractals (beyond skinny, medium and thick) do exist, they reside not 'in between' skinny and medium, but rather, below (or faster than) a skinny line.

As a result, we rarely see them. However, when we do see these faster (than skinny line) fractals, they operate in the exact same fashion as all other fractals (skinny, medium and thick) which we see each and every day.

While the remainder of your question provides logical points which one can observe as correct or incorrect - simply by viewing a thoroughly annotated chart, the question leaves out one very important point.

What role (if any) does 'context' play in the application of your conclusion?

One can, quite easily, find themselves far 'off track' simply by applying the correct rule to the in-correct context. For this very reason, I have recommended everyone learn to differentiate the 'subtle differences' which develop time after time.

To that end, I plan to post another differentiation drill later this weekend.

While you may feel that I have failed to answer your question sufficiently, if you read my response closely, you should see that I have provided you valuable direction.

HTH.

- Spydertrader

[ljyoung]

Originally Posted by Spydertrader »

One cannot 'gather together' that which does not exist.

While certainly, additional trading fractals (beyond skinny, medium and thick) do exist, they reside not 'in between' skinny and medium, but rather, below (or faster than) a skinny line.

As a result, we rarely see them. However, when we do see these faster (than skinny line) fractals, they operate in the exact same fashion as all other fractals (skinny, medium and thick) which we see each and every day.

While the remainder of your question provides logical points which one can observe as correct or incorrect - simply by viewing a thoroughly annotated chart, the question leaves out one very important point.

What role (if any) does 'context' play in the application of your conclusion?

One can, quite easily, find themselves far 'off track' simply by applying the correct rule to the in-correct context. For this very reason, I have recommended everyone learn to differentiate the 'subtle differences' which develop time after time.

To that end, I plan to post another differentiation drill later this weekend.

While you may feel that I have failed to answer your question sufficiently, if you read my response closely, you should see that I have provided you valuable direction.

HTH.

- Spydertrader

Thank you for your thoughts. You answered my question with sufficiency.

The choice of the phrase 'in between' was reached after some consideration and is best viewed as a functional description of what I see. IMO, the basic unit of 'PV currency', if you will, for the traverse trader is the 2 bar tape which is the most simple type of what you call a 'skinny fractal'.

There is a large component of context present in what I discussed, though it may either be unapparent or appear to be different from other sorts of context. The basic principles of the PV relationship are adhered to.

In passing let it be said that it is very nice indeed to have a pleasant portal which permits a frequently meaningful exchange of ideas about the method. The periodic purveyors of maltransference are voided with logical thought not howling and screaming or worse, magical thinking.

Catch you later.

lj

[Spydertrader]

Drawing tapes to translating bars should rarely cause anyone difficulty. After all, connecting higher lows and higher highs (or lower highs and lower lows) represents the easiest of all tapes to draw. However, the majority of our trading day contains bars which do not show translation. We've already discussed some of these examples (Stitch & Lateral Formations), but what about the other internals?

Perhaps, a bit of differentiation with respect to Pennants can provide some clarity. The quickest bit of differentiation results from what type of Pennant the market has created.

Flat Top Pennant (FTP)
Flat Bottom Pennant (FBP)
Symmetrical Pennant (Sym)

(Examples Attached)



What else might differentiate these three - from each other and from the rest of the market?

Grab a clean copy of Friday's 5 minute ES chart, and begin to look for subtle differences - again, between the three examples and between all three examples and the rest of the market day.

I'll start you off with one ...

Two of the three Pennants already have a 'built in' way to draw a trend line. The third example requires another bar in order to determine which trend line presents a correct view of the market.

Group the various differences together in order to form a consistant view (based on context), and apply that view onto all congruent contexts.

Take some time to focus on what develops after the market creates these pennants.

HTH.

- Spydertrader

[jbarnby]

Originally Posted by Spydertrader »

What else might differentiate these three - from each other and from the rest of the market?

Grab a clean copy of Friday's 5 minute ES chart, and begin to look for subtle differences - again, between the three examples and between all three examples and the rest of the market day.


Take some time to focus on what develops after the market creates these pennants.

I took the charts for Thursday and Friday and removed all annotations. I decided to begin with FBP and FTP formations. I highlighted all FBP/FTP's for those two days. After review, here are some early findings.

In an uptrend, FTP's usually BO with increasing volume in the direction of the trend, thus presenting continuation in the direction of the tape created by the FTP. Same applies for FBP in a downtrend.

In an uptrend, FTP's which break to the downside seem to indicate a change in mode, but volume on the BO bar is telling. If the BO bar is decreasing volume, it's usually a minor retrace or the beginning of a lateral formation. A BO to the downside on increasing volume seems to suggest a shift in trend. The same principle applies to FBP's in a downtrend.

I also noted FTT's following FBP/FTP on a couple of occasions, which seemed to have occurred on higher (peaking) volume.

As stated, these are early finding, and I hope I'm approaching this correctly. Tomorrow I plan to add SYM pennants to the review.

[TIKITRADER]

Firday's ES chart. All Ftp, Fbp and Sym pennants labeled. Sym pennants marked.
Sym pennants can be contained within laterals.
Also Sym pennants can be found at points of change from dominance and non dominance.

volume removed to focus on the price formations

[NYCMB]

Originally Posted by romanus »

Here's another one, in case you were ever wondering (like me ) what the hell was built that day.

Hi romanus,
No offense here. It's very suspecious that the pink trendlines (starts at the 3rd bar) represent ES 5 min traverse. Based on your gaussians, real point 3 occured on the RTL of a tape. Could you clarify it? TIA

[jbarnby]

Continuing with the pennant drill, my observations are similar to Tikitrader's in that SYM pennants are often located where the market is transitioning from non-dom to dom...or 2-3 of some goat. I tried to differentiate SYM pennants by volume, noting that usually the second (internal) bar of the pennants have decreasing volume when compared to the first bar. One example I found which is different is 1545 on Friday. The 1545 pennant has increasing volume on the second (internal) bar of the pennant, which is interesting because at this point the market returned to the dominant trending direction.

[NYCMB]

Hi Spydertrader,

I have Dotted, Orange and Light green Lateral Formations. Does any of them end on wrong bar? TIA