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.

Recommended Posts

paltalk room performance week 2, I plan to run it for 2 more weeks, thanks to all who stop by.

 

Interesting take on the JH method...thanks for sharing it! Basically, you are scalping for a tick or two (average profit/trade=1 1/2 ticks)...I saw how you average into the trades. I guess there is no arguing with a 100% Win percentage, even though I would wonder what happens if you get a fast move against you... then you might take lst's say a 2 pt loss on your 5 lots, and one such trade would wipe out a week of the small wins... especially since you seem to trade through market news....but apparently you are able to make it work, which would seem like a strong argument for the validity of "wmcn".... my interest lies in the opposite direction: I would like to figure out how to trade the way Eric did on one of the videos, just be right on the main direction 3-5 times a day and hold until the RTL is broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting take on the JH method...thanks for sharing it! Basically, you are scalping for a tick or two (average profit/trade=1 1/2 ticks)...I saw how you average into the trades. I guess there is no arguing with a 100% Win percentage, even though I would wonder what happens if you get a fast move against you... then you might take lst's say a 2 pt loss on your 5 lots, and one such trade would wipe out a week of the small wins... especially since you seem to trade through market news....but apparently you are able to make it work, which would seem like a strong argument for the validity of "wmcn".... my interest lies in the opposite direction: I would like to figure out how to trade the way Eric did on one of the videos, just be right on the main direction 3-5 times a day and hold until the RTL is broken.

 

just try to get people to start figure out how to put into practice some part of the method, surely this setup is not the most money making setup or the most winning setup. It is just something that is simple to teach simple to show. I like to keep it at 100% if I can, the next step is to reduce number of contracts while keeping target of 100/day the same. One step at a time, crawl , walk then fly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some more thoughts;

 

I Basically, you are scalping for a tick or two (average profit/trade=1 1/2 ticks)..

 

each es level is 2000 deep, think about it.

 

... my interest lies in the opposite direction: I would like to figure out how to trade the way Eric did on one of the videos, just be right on the main direction 3-5 times a day and hold until the RTL is broken.

 

I am not Eric and neither are you, give it some thoughts, would you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My attempt to annotate yesterday, which appears to me an elongated pt 3 move after the news. One which from the gaussians shows it is yet in the last leg up of a fanned the channel. I think Monday will confirm that observation of WMCN. I might have made a couple of mistakes in the lower fractal annotations which is not surprising with the slow pace in afternoon session.

 

:)

5aa7105c280b1_ES11Feb11.thumb.png.63ed5ae869d2d68bf9ae48003c865d59.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
some more thoughts;

 

 

I am not Eric and neither are you, give it some thoughts, would you.

 

That is true of course, but neither am I you... just have never traded a method where the target is 1 or two ticks, with the risk not really defined, no matter how much volume there is...but, like I said- thanks for sharing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Google faster fractal traverse

 

Thank you for your suggestion. Unfortunately I am none the wiser. Nowhere can I find a definition of a "faster fractal traverse" or an explanation for the difference between it and a "real traverse". I am still puzzled as to how one can identify and correctly annotate nested fractals.Would you be kind enough to give an explanation here for the benefit of myself and others in a similar situation?

Edited by Zan-shin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for your suggestion. Unfortunately I am none the wiser. Nowhere can I find a definition of a "faster fractal traverse" or an explanation for the difference between it and a "real traverse". I am still puzzled as to how one can identify and correctly annotate nested fractals.Would you be kind enough to give an explanation here for the benefit of myself and others in a similar situation?
I use the words "faster fractal traverse" when I refer to a traverse on a fractal faster than another fractal. I don't give it a special significance that has a specific definition. I use "faster", "slower", or "same" to relate traverses on various fractals. In the example you posted, that started this exchange of messages, there was a non dominant traverse. In relation to it I annotated a "faster fractal traverse", which was one of the legs of the traverse in discussion. There is no other meaning behind my using of "faster fractal traverse".

 

Regarding the second part of your question, and I assume that this is the actual thing you're struggling with, "how one can identify and correctly annotate nested fractals", this is actually one of the fundamentals of the method in discussion on this thread. I have no better way of explaining it than what Spydertrader posted. There is a "puzzling" contradiction between the simplicity of the basic principles of this method and how difficult it is to actually apply them successfully in real time. This is probably caused by the baggage of beliefs and misconceptions that every student of the method adds.

 

My suggestion, to anybody who asks, is to not get stuck in looking for irrefutable definitions and rules that would make it all clear and mechanically applicable, but to get into the mode of trying to understand what's happening on three observable fractals, where the middle fractal is the trading fractal, and have an opinion at the closing of each bar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just try to get people to start figure out how to put into practice some part of the method, surely this setup is not the most money making setup or the most winning setup. It is just something that is simple to teach simple to show........

 

Some more thoughts:

It seems that many are struggling with the whole fractal issue...and it seems that you have developed a method that identifies one specific leg of a sequence (such as the 2nd 2B in a B2B-2R-2B sequence) and then takes out a small amount of that leg with high reliability.

 

Now- if you can identify one specific leg with such high reliability, why not the END of a whole sequence for a longer trade?

What I have a hard time understanding (and I mean this in no way disparaging!) is that years of study of this method would not result in being able to identify the major turning points, and that being able to define one specific leg so precisely does not automatically lead to understanding a whole sequence? After all, what is different about identifying the 2nd 2B from identifying the R2R which should start a whole new sequence?

 

In the old ET threads that I reviewed, it seems to me that Spyder went from coarse to fine...he talked about identifying the FTT before there even was any precise Gaussian annotation on the charts, that came later..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some more thoughts:

It seems that many are struggling with the whole fractal issue...and it seems that you have developed a method that identifies one specific leg of a sequence (such as the 2nd 2B in a B2B-2R-2B sequence) and then takes out a small amount of that leg with high reliability.

....

 

....?

my theory is very simple if you learn how to id a specify seg of fractal then you id them all, sort of if you know for sure where the tail is then you know where the head is. The rest of your post is highly speculative feel free to speculate it anyway you want.

 

ps. a case for why free teaching is a bad idea.

Edited by Corey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
my theory is very simple if you learn how to id a specify seg of fractal then you id them all, sort of if you know for sure where the tail is then you know where the head is. The rest of your post is highly speculative feel free to speculate it anyway you want.

 

ps. a case for why free teaching is a bad idea.

 

A "bad idea"? How so... because I voiced a question? Isn't that a bit thin-skinned- I said "in no way disparaging"...trying to understand that's all!

 

"my theory is very simple if you learn how to id a specify seg of fractal then you id them all'... yes, that was exactly my point...so...why, if I may (respectfully) ask this question again, do you trade a portion of one leg and not the whole sequence? Did I perhaps misunderstand you? Are you saying that you normally trade the whole sequence, but for teaching purposes you split it up? I thought you always trade this way.

 

I remember some JH post on ET where he talks about trader Greenspan who scalps for a tick with 140 lots, and I think he calls him an example of inefficiency... so, just wondering...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if you take 4 trades,

one trade makes 1 pt (4 ticks),

3 trades break even,

what is the average PnL?

(assuming the comm is built-in)

 

1 tick obviously.

Why don't you shoot for 1 pt with all 4 lots for a total of 4 pts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 tick obviously.

Why don't you shoot for 1 pt with all 4 lots for a total of 4 pts?

 

Why don't you shoot for 2 pts with 4 contracts in a throw for a total of 32 pts?

 

 

 

 

ps. this is not a smart a** reply... if you can see the fault in your reasoning, maybe you can see the wisdom in mine. Or... maybe you will re-evaluate whatever is in front of you.

Edited by Tams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why don't you shoot for 2 pts with 4 contracts in a throw for a total of 32 pts?

 

 

 

 

ps. this is not a smart a** reply... if you can see the fault in your reasoning, maybe you can see the wisdom in mine. Or maybe you will re-evaluate whether RTL is what you should be aiming for.[/QUOT

 

???... I give up. This is not about what I shoot for (which, btw, is 8-16 ticks per contract, I trade only mornings 8-11:30.)

 

This is about your method, not mine.... I am checking it out and was surprised to see that such numbers were considered feasible or desirable.... But it seems that I am either misunderstanding something or not- either way it seems that I can only get cryptic puzzles as answers...too time consuming, so let's just let it rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Volume leads Price. Always. And without exception.

 

 

Much debate has ensued over the years with respect to whether or not Volume represents helpful and / or useful information with respect to understanding Price change....

 

Rather than create yet another environment for posting opinions or sowing the seeds for epic battles over dogmatic philosophies, my goal here is to provide a framework, for anyone with an interest, to learn how to learn to ‘see’ the Price / Volume Relationship at work as shown through the fractal nature of all markets. In other words, this thread isn’t about me teaching people to trade, ‘calling’ trades or seeking converts to a new religious cult. This thread is about the individual trader developing the skills needed, and the knowledge required, to learn to trade based on what the market says, instead of what the trader believes (or I post). ....

 

To reiterate, this thread will not teach you to trade. If you are looking for a canned set of rules for entry and exit, look elsewhere. However, this thread will teach you to learn how to teach yourself to trade using the only tools you’ll ever need – a chart and your own brain.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Vienna,

 

I can understand and appreciate the frustrations of a student or someone new trying to learn especially through forum threads. I know how you felt and feel the same many times before. I believe there have been others as well. If I am not wrong, one example, I quote is Gucci who apparently had "get it" after going through the same, maybe longer. Believe me I had the same issues in studying the JH method.

 

But what I found was that those who offer to help are sincere and trying their best. I found that the process was done in a way for us to discover the way to read the markets, rather than to point and show us that is so, as many would have love it to, as would me LOL.

 

But the market does not appear as simple as 4 vol moves and 3 price moves to us newbies, or at least to those untrained to see it so. Hence, I think IMHO, we need to go through the drills and screen time to be able to correctly annotate it and see the market in its fractals. It might not be a short journey and its also has been many months for me.

 

I appreciate those who took their time to post the questions like yourself and many others some of whom are no longer active, because it is through these questions, that we the more quieter or busier ones can learn; when we have the time to. Many times when I do not understand something, I would move on till later someone else posted a more correct question and the answer comes along as sometimes, I would find myself in a situation of not knowing how to ask :). I can imagine what went through those who untiredly continued to answer questions upon questions (and mostly the same ones!) over the months if not years (cnms2, gucci, corey, tikitrader, spyder, etc, etc). I can see they too had to continue to post charts and edit charts posted in order to help in the best way they can.

 

I hope you do not take offense of my comments. I can see you are also sincere in learning. I am still very much in the process of learning too but if you like to perhaps share thoughts and to help each other along, you are welcome to PM me.

 

Have a good day,

emac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vienna,

 

............

 

I hope you do not take offense of my comments. I can see you are also sincere in learning. I am still very much in the process of learning too but if you like to perhaps share thoughts and to help each other along, you are welcome to PM me.

 

Have a good day,

emac

 

Thanks for the kind words!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a suggestion on how to speed up the process of reviewing the jhm journals in ET.First make a list of all the posters in the first futures journal(http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=83604&perpage=6&pagenumber=1) except Spydertrader.Then go to the home page on ET and click on your "inbox".Then click on "edit ignore list".Put all the usernames in the ignore list except Spydertrader.Now review the first futures journal skipping quickly over the finer tools sections(starts around pg 450). Then move on to the iterative refinement journal(http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113310&perpage=6&pagenumber=1) and add to the ignore list any additional usernames.Do all the drills in the journals.Then reread both journals again this time reviewing the finer tools.hth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's a suggestion on how to speed up the process of reviewing the jhm journals in ET.First make a list of all the posters in the first futures journal(http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=83604&perpage=6&pagenumber=1) except Spydertrader.Then go to the home page on ET and click on your "inbox".Then click on "edit ignore list".Put all the usernames in the ignore list except Spydertrader.Now review the first futures journal skipping quickly over the finer tools sections(starts around pg 450). Then move on to the iterative refinement journal(http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113310&perpage=6&pagenumber=1) and add to the ignore list any additional usernames.Do all the drills in the journals.Then reread both journals again this time reviewing the finer tools.hth

 

That is funny...that is exactly what I did!

I figured if any of the contributions were useful, Spyder would respond to them...so they should appear in his posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post. I am a 25 year student of volume and range analysis and I would urge that all volume is not created equal. In other words, volume seems to have some analytical or predictive value only when the volume correlates to an instrument that is not dependent on the price movement of another instrument. For instance, the ES (Emini S&P 500)--when the S&P 500 Cash Index is increasing in price, the ES will follow, regardless of the volume. A multitude of program traders assure the price of the two instruments stay within fair market value of one another. But this cannot mean that the ES volume holds predictive value for the cash index it follows. With that said, it can reasonably be argued that the ES influences the cash market prior to the cash market opening. But that influence is shortly lived. In the end, and as the old saying goes, cash is king.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

room performance final week - goal $100/day - the room purpose is to show you how to gain a toe hold in Jack Universe by using a simple setup. I hope I show it clear enough and simple enough. Thanks to all attendants we may do it again if time permit, so long for now.

room4.thumb.png.71695d2c813de395129e9e9980a23e9d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great post. I am a 25 year student of volume and range analysis and I would urge that all volume is not created equal. In other words, volume seems to have some analytical or predictive value only when the volume correlates to an instrument that is not dependent on the price movement of another instrument. For instance, the ES (Emini S&P 500)--when the S&P 500 Cash Index is increasing in price, the ES will follow, regardless of the volume. A multitude of program traders assure the price of the two instruments stay within fair market value of one another. But this cannot mean that the ES volume holds predictive value for the cash index it follows. With that said, it can reasonably be argued that the ES influences the cash market prior to the cash market opening. But that influence is shortly lived. In the end, and as the old saying goes, cash is king.

 

I think you make an extremely interesting point. Since I am new to PV trading and the JH method I am hopeful that someone with more experience will respond to your post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • 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.