Jump to content

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.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

brownsfan019

Futures I Trade Show & Brooks Book

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I am new to this forum and would like to say that this forum has been very informative and engaging. Am struggling with Al's book but I hope that I can hunker down and get through it. Reading the posts here really do help.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Have a question that I was hoping some of you experts here can help me with. =)

 

In Al's book, he states that a H1 is a bar with a higer high than the previous bar, in a pull back in a bull trend.

 

However, many a time i see that he also counts L1's and L2's even when the candles are moving steadily upwards.

 

What am I missing here ? :confused:

 

Also, Upon identifying a H1, if lets say the market continues to drop lower, when do you void this H1 count and determine that the trend has changed? When do you go from counting a H2, and then deciding that the next instance is a H1?

 

Thanks for any help =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maletor

You can count H1,2,3,4 from swing highs *or* swing lows.

Same goes for L1,2,3,4.

 

Depends on if you are looking for a reversal or pullback.

 

To answer your other question, it is when there is a new swing high / swing low in place.

These are subjective places but if you wanted to make it objective you could call it a bar preceded by and followed by 2 higher highs / lower lows. (Search fractal for the pattern I'm trying to describe here.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could someone please offer some advice, or comment on the attached chart please. I'm on my second read through the book now, but today realised I still don't really have the faintest idea what I'm doing.

 

I think I should just stick with one pattern that I can see easily, and that's the DB/DT, which I didn't take today as my mind was too messed up with regards to direction.

 

Anyway, I can't clarify in my mind how to trade a trendline break. When the line breaks at (a), we then look for a continuation of the trend. I assume we're meant to go long on bar (b). It didn't trigger but bar © had a MTB which triggered and then stopped you out.

 

That continuation broke on the next bar. Am I right in thinking that the bar after © is the bar we should short.

 

The problem I'm having is, is that when a trendline breaks and you then go into drawing smaller degree trendlines, which you want to break to clarify a change in trend, the move often happens before any confirmation can happen.

 

If I'm drawing too many trendlines after the break at (a), I don't understand at what point the continuation of the trend is indicated as having failed.

 

It could even be argued that the pattern after the break at (a) forms a DB bull flag that fails. There's just too much information for me to process in real time, and by the time I had, the move was over. I was looking for a short, as the move up looked like a wedge, but it just kept on growing.

 

Did anyone else find today difficult, or was it just me.

 

Thanks.

5aa70f0df13d1_ES09-0904_08_2009(5Min).thumb.jpg.a8e76d9a46c43f1ed8e7e4721b03932b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could someone please offer some advice, or comment on the attached chart please. I'm on my second read through the book now, but today realised I still don't really have the faintest idea what I'm doing.

 

I think I should just stick with one pattern that I can see easily, and that's the DB/DT, which I didn't take today as my mind was too messed up with regards to direction.

 

Anyway, I can't clarify in my mind how to trade a trendline break. When the line breaks at (a), we then look for a continuation of the trend. I assume we're meant to go long on bar (b). It didn't trigger but bar © had a MTB which triggered and then stopped you out.

 

That continuation broke on the next bar. Am I right in thinking that the bar after © is the bar we should short.

 

The problem I'm having is, is that when a trendline breaks and you then go into drawing smaller degree trendlines, which you want to break to clarify a change in trend, the move often happens before any confirmation can happen.

 

If I'm drawing too many trendlines after the break at (a), I don't understand at what point the continuation of the trend is indicated as having failed.

 

It could even be argued that the pattern after the break at (a) forms a DB bull flag that fails. There's just too much information for me to process in real time, and by the time I had, the move was over. I was looking for a short, as the move up looked like a wedge, but it just kept on growing.

 

Did anyone else find today difficult, or was it just me.

 

Thanks.

 

Look for patterns yourself and then go to AB's web site and compare your chart to his. With time things should start to become clearer. Don't cheat and look at his chart first. If you really want to learn you have to do the work yourself first then use his chart to correct yours. Yes today was tough for me as well. Too many overlapping bars. I only took one trade, the H2 at 1002.50 at 12:45 NYT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maletor

ACS, you weren't worried about the developing wedge?

 

Or were you trading a failed wedge / H2?

 

I like how Al wrote on his chart near EOD H2... three times in one spot.

 

I missed the first, second and third one. :) Got to work on some mental endurance.

 

That was the best trade of the day I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EMA Gap Bar: In a flat or up market, it is a bar with a high below the EMA.

 

On the attached chart, is my understanding of the EMA gap correct, in that every bar under the EMA is a signal bar, and once the signal bar triggers it becomes the entry bar.

 

Therefore, would I be correct in thinking that a buy stop is to be placed above every bar under/over the EMA in a flat market, in the hope it triggers and becomes the gap bar.

 

Or am I misinterpreting what he means by 'bar with a high below the EMA'.

 

Thanks.

ES_1.jpg.717f70cce0379b9d0920b93966f0e8bd.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ACS, you weren't worried about the developing wedge?

 

Or were you trading a failed wedge / H2?

 

I like how Al wrote on his chart near EOD H2... three times in one spot.

 

I missed the first, second and third one. :) Got to work on some mental endurance.

 

That was the best trade of the day I think.

 

I was trading a trend that had not yet broken the trendline or had a strong reversal pattern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EMA Gap Bar: In a flat or up market, it is a bar with a high below the EMA.

 

On the attached chart, is my understanding of the EMA gap correct, in that every bar under the EMA is a signal bar, and once the signal bar triggers it becomes the entry bar.

 

Therefore, would I be correct in thinking that a buy stop is to be placed above every bar under/over the EMA in a flat market, in the hope it triggers and becomes the gap bar.

 

Or am I misinterpreting what he means by 'bar with a high below the EMA'.

 

Thanks.

 

EMA Gap is a type of trend trade and requires the same preconditions as all trend trades. When he says "flat" I assume it means a very short term flat correction in an otherwise strong uptrend and not an overall flat market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the first trade was going to be a strong down-up reversal, but in hindsight I can see it was probably a failed BO pullback.

 

Second trade was an H2 by my counting (still unsure on the counting, but working on it) and second attempt to reverse yesterday's low.

 

Last trade was a wedge and DT.

 

I was not at the PC for the DBBF just above my text, but might have taken it.

5aa70f0f0f9ba_ES09-0905_08_2009(5Min).jpg.55ff651f6781ff264aed0b2a23a3c80c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was busy setting up my new account today, but took a demo trade anyway. In all honesty I wouldn't have took it live. If I had a larger account, and could tolerate a wider stop then I would.

 

However, was the NFP move being setup in pre-market with the DB and then the DBPB, and even a MTFB.

 

I also think my counting could be at fault, as especially with including forex charts, I seem to be seeing more H3's as being the setups that trigger a move. Granted, the H2 including pre-market data never triggered, but it was close.

5aa70f101ae31_ES09-0907_08_2009(5Min).jpg.8d380595ac79eafe36da75c55fe0b01f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first post on this forum...

 

This book is about to drive me crazy, there are so many inconsistencies or down right errors - I'm about to give up. For example, H1, 2, 3, 4 and L1, 2, 3, 4 definitions and examples are just not consistent throughout the book. Check out page 120, Figure 4-16. This chart shows 11 Lx's in a strong bull trend right after he explains Lx

 

"Likewise, a Low 1 (Ll) occurs in an down or sideways market, and a Low 2, 3, and 4 are comparable to their High 2, 3, and 4 counterparts."

 

Clearly the first part of that chart is in a strong bull trend, why would he even consider identifying Lx's in a strong bull trend. He does go on to say:

 

"Although many are labeled, when the market is clearly trending up, you should not be looking to sell most Low 1 and Low 2 setups."

 

By his own definition, a Lx doesn't even exist in a bull trend.

 

I really have the sense that price action is the way to trade. So many indicator based mechanical systems I have tried have failed. I was really hoping (based on favorable reviews) that this Brooks book would be the definitive PA book - please, someone tell me that there is a payoff for reading this entire thing, I'm not sure I can get through it without some hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My first post on this forum...

 

This book is about to drive me crazy, there are so many inconsistencies or down right errors - I'm about to give up. For example, H1, 2, 3, 4 and L1, 2, 3, 4 definitions and examples are just not consistent throughout the book. Check out page 120, Figure 4-16. This chart shows 11 Lx's in a strong bull trend right after he explains Lx

 

"Likewise, a Low 1 (Ll) occurs in an down or sideways market, and a Low 2, 3, and 4 are comparable to their High 2, 3, and 4 counterparts."

 

Clearly the first part of that chart is in a strong bull trend, why would he even consider identifying Lx's in a strong bull trend. He does go on to say:

 

"Although many are labeled, when the market is clearly trending up, you should not be looking to sell most Low 1 and Low 2 setups."

 

By his own definition, a Lx doesn't even exist in a bull trend.

 

I really have the sense that price action is the way to trade. So many indicator based mechanical systems I have tried have failed. I was really hoping (based on favorable reviews) that this Brooks book would be the definitive PA book - please, someone tell me that there is a payoff for reading this entire thing, I'm not sure I can get through it without some hope.

 

I'm of the opinion he was merely demonstrating, as is obvious with legs, that both highs and lows exist in an uptrend but these were not necessarily to used as entries. With regard to your final comment, I believe that one cannot overstate the importance of this book. It's fair to say it's not written in the best way and perhaps this labeling of H1 L1 etc is a little ambiguous at time but for me the crux of the matter is that price action is a highly subjective subject and one must be able to express themselves as they see it to properly convey the situation (to be true to themselves). Secondly, I'm yet to complete the book but, I feel that the effort is more than worth the reward. There are such small nuances,and subtleties to price action trading that if you can look past the books short comings you will find some genuinely invaluable information. The book definitely gets better the more you read. I already notice a small polarization of perspective in the way I trade Forex in all time frames so something must be working. So, keep at it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My first post on this forum...

 

This book is about to drive me crazy, there are so many inconsistencies or down right errors - I'm about to give up. For example, H1, 2, 3, 4 and L1, 2, 3, 4 definitions and examples are just not consistent throughout the book. Check out page 120, Figure 4-16. This chart shows 11 Lx's in a strong bull trend right after he explains Lx

 

"Likewise, a Low 1 (Ll) occurs in an down or sideways market, and a Low 2, 3, and 4 are comparable to their High 2, 3, and 4 counterparts."

 

Clearly the first part of that chart is in a strong bull trend, why would he even consider identifying Lx's in a strong bull trend. He does go on to say:

 

"Although many are labeled, when the market is clearly trending up, you should not be looking to sell most Low 1 and Low 2 setups."

 

By his own definition, a Lx doesn't even exist in a bull trend.

 

I really have the sense that price action is the way to trade. So many indicator based mechanical systems I have tried have failed. I was really hoping (based on favorable reviews) that this Brooks book would be the definitive PA book - please, someone tell me that there is a payoff for reading this entire thing, I'm not sure I can get through it without some hope.

 

It will take several readings of the book and viewings of his lectures before details such as that start to make sense. And even without the details there are many big picture concepts that are alone worth the effort. The most obvious one is the discussion of how trends behave and terminate and when to switch from with trend to counter trend setups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a worthwhile book though there are probably easier sources to get a grounding in 'price action'. Dunnigan, Joe Ross law of charts, Gann (not all his stuff was esoteric), Trader Vic (trend line breaks and 2B's) etc etc.

 

If you already 'know price action' it might give you an easier time of things. Also take a setup at a time and make sure you have that down. Finally a lot of the material is just observations, 'if this happens then often that happens'. Leave those until later when you have the basic framework down.

 

btw I agree there most certainly is inconstancies in descriptions of L1 L2 H1 H2's, I noticed that pretty much straight a way ("hang on, by definition that should only occur in a side ways or up market"). The important thing is identifying the legs and the context of those legs, the H1 L1,s are simply 'delimiters' to legs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, I am very grateful to have found this book. I've been studying for several months and am doing very well with it. Some things that helped were watching the videos several times to get warmed up to the concepts and the lingo. Then, the articles. Finally, I found it essential to go to brooks price action - Home and print out charts so I could see them!

 

My ongoing confusion, though, is the concept of "breakout pullback." Is this simply a little pullback after a breakout? It seems, from what I read and parse something more.

 

Like: price is in a bullish uptrend, say at 900. It "breaks out" downward to 890. This is the breakout. This fails, and price returns to the 898-900 area. This is a failure of the breakout. It then attempt to break out again, and falls back to the 890-892 area. Is this the "breakout pullback?" Is it a pullback to the area of the orignal breakout, and a potential setup for a long if it fails? Am I making this hard and it is it just the 2nd of two attempts to breakout and thus a with trend setup?

 

Help! Please!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My ongoing confusion, though, is the concept of "breakout pullback." Is this simply a little pullback after a breakout? It seems, from what I read and parse something more.

 

Like: price is in a bullish uptrend, say at 900. It "breaks out" downward to 890. This is the breakout. This fails, and price returns to the 898-900 area. This is a failure of the breakout. It then attempt to break out again, and falls back to the 890-892 area. Is this the "breakout pullback?" Is it a pullback to the area of the orignal breakout, and a potential setup for a long if it fails? Am I making this hard and it is it just the 2nd of two attempts to breakout and thus a with trend setup?

 

Help! Please!

When the market is trending it will try to break the trend but most attempts fail and the trend resumes; that is a pullback. Sometimes the failure stops before it makes new highs/lows in the trend and it then reverses back in the direction of the breakout. In other words the failed breakout fails and becomes a breakout pullback in the new trend. Often there will be a period of uncertainty whether it is just a pullback in the old trend or a breakout pullback in a new trend until the market tips its hand by further price action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.