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

FilterTip,

 

Is there any reason you start annotating the DAX from the futures open 8:00am vs. the cash open 9:00am ?

 

I have attached the DAX chart from 9:00am open and that big move was an FTT from the previous day (carry over) as opposed to a pt3 from that day.

 

Any comments appreciated, thanks.

DAX.thumb.png.0cd440627fd9af5d806685ec6771779e.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FilterTip,

 

Is there any reason you start annotating the DAX from the futures open 8:00am vs. the cash open 9:00am ?

 

I have attached the DAX chart from 9:00am open and that big move was an FTT from the previous day (carry over) as opposed to a pt3 from that day.

 

Any comments appreciated, thanks.

 

Hi xioxxio

 

First off my pc is set to EST so the times on the DAX chart I posted are not correct re Eurex times..not with standing that, I didn't annotate any carry over on that chart..I just wanted to step right in so to speak and see what was what and how/if I could see things.

 

As for starting the DAX chart I think there is enough going on in the one hour pre cash open,

but I think it better, as your snippet shows, to synch the start and end time to the cash, as volume would be at a minimum sufficient level.

 

 

Gucci is the Daxer par excellence :) so perhaps/hopefully if he's still around reading

here he might be able to offer more in sites..

 

hope that helps

Edited by FilterTip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is interesting to me that we have ended up at about the same place. I started my current annotations from a clean slate a few days ago......

 

I look at both the 15 and the 60 (and, infrequently, the daily) for the big picture, all of them degapped.

The tapes on the 15 correspond almost exactly to the traverses on the 5 (got that from Mak)....so, if there is a slower fractal RTL or LTL looming nearby, I want to know....have seen price react to these too often....(don't ask me why this works, have no idea)...

 

hth, Vienna

5aa710e0be2ed_15and60.thumb.gif.e5bb8d51cc830e1a4760d1d285f05295.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Early day clarity on yesterday's puzzle, and some perspective

 

With respect to The Market, anything can, and often does, happen. Whether or not such occurances translate into an opportunity for profit results from the skill set of the individual trader's ability to M.A.D.A. - all in an appropriate and timely fashion. As such, the question is not, "does this happen?" Rather, the question should be, "If this happens, would I 'see' it, and if so, would I know what it was quick enough, in order for me to act accordingly?" Only you know the answer to such a question.

 

- Spydertrader

5aa710e0ced38_ES06-12(5Min)3_23_2012a.thumb.jpg.b1ba3ac898a3745b9b096915101084ab.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's chart. Low volume with FBOs was tricky in real time.

 

I can't attach the spreadsheet I made for pace so I took a screenshot of the output. Volatility data is only the last 14 days but volume data goes back 20 days. Current as of EOD today.

5aa710e0df89f_ES06-12(5Min)3_23_2012.thumb.jpg.2b56765f1400ba492a7b7bc328edf431.jpg

pace.PNG.0dc2583c4d934774e6a469f2bfcf85b1.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was expecting to see a down traverse followed by up traverse today. I guess I got something like that. Pretty sure I'm not off by a fractal level, but if anyone has something different, I would like to see it.

 

One goal I had for today was to see volume with no noise and annotate every peak and trough. Every volume peak is a point 1, 2, or FTT, while every volume trough is an X2X or point 3. 15:30 I did not see a complete sequence for. I expect this is because pace increased after the initial R2R and dropped the second trough out of visibility.

5aa710e1bf83f_ES06-12(5Min)3_26_2012.thumb.jpg.eb61633a53c389ca2502923c1f4d3648.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No noise.

 

Changed some fractal levels from yesterday. Something about VEs that I need to look into.

 

Tried a new convention for doing sub-skinny volume lines. I think I like it.

5aa710e27b2a3_ES06-12(5Min)3_27_2012.thumb.jpg.a7ce9e7552ad1ae3e584280c4ecd653b.jpg

Edited by amisme
haha I'm good at internets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, another general question about maintaining fractal integrity.

 

Let's say I have a traverse, and it accelerates. I get a new point 3 and I redraw the RTL. What are the requirements now for establishing a new traverse in the opposite direction? Does point 2 need to occur outside the accelerated RTL, or the original RTL? I would think that a pace acceleration would reshape the container in such a way that the new RTL becomes the meaningful RTL for maintaining fractal integrity, though the original RTL may still be relevant as a bookmark.

 

Spyder did state early on in the journals that the original RTL was mandatory and the accelerated was optional, but I don't think there was the same emphasis on fractal differentiation back then. Examples early in this thread lead me to think that this is not something to go by.

 

Has anyone had good results maintaining fractal integrity while requiring original RTLs to be broken after a pace acceleration greatly steepens a container?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vienna,

 

I read your old posts. You were confused by bbt, tape, traverse and channel. It seemed you had no idea how to annotate a chart at that time.

 

I am still struggling how to annotate the charts. How did you 'get it' and finally annotate a chart correctly? What drills or work did you do?

 

Thanks!

 

gamblerKi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gamblerKi, which market are you trading?

 

I am far from the trading stage. I seldomly watch the market at real-time.

 

I only annotate the static charts. I annotated ES, DAX and KS static charts but unable to annotate correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ES VolumePace from January to mid March. It's amazing how close the values are to amisme data.

 

How do the values on this graphic (e.g. fast from 19-31k) relate to the pace lines? Would the pace line for fast be at 19k then, or in the middle between 19 and 31k?

 

Just giving an example, the numbers might be off...

 

thanks,

 

Vienna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do the values on this graphic (e.g. fast from 19-31k) relate to the pace lines? Would the pace line for fast be at 19k then, or in the middle between 19 and 31k?

 

Just giving an example, the numbers might be off...

 

thanks,

 

Vienna

 

All calculations are done by Mac's spreadsheet (volumepacemak). I just plug in 5 minute ES Bloomberg data and run the macro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone happen to have charts for the "channel drill" from June 13 2009 to August 5 2009?

 

edit: For anyone wondering, I did find the answer to my earlier question. The accelerated RTL is used for RTL break test and pt2 confirmation of a new container.

Edited by amisme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:)

All calculations are done by Mac's spreadsheet (volumepacemak). I just plug in 5 minute ES Bloomberg data and run the macro.

 

OK thank you...this was not really my question but is welcome information ...where can i find the original spreadsheet with the macros intact?

 

thanks,

 

Vienna

Edited by vienna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Vienna,

 

I read your old posts. You were confused by bbt, tape, traverse and channel. It seemed you had no idea how to annotate a chart at that time.

 

I am still struggling how to annotate the charts. How did you 'get it' and finally annotate a chart correctly? What drills or work did you do?

 

Thanks!

 

gamblerKi

 

 

" It seemed you had no idea how to annotate a chart at that time."- darn right!....:)

 

Just doing it, repetition, repetition. As to drills, the most useful I think was taking 50 charts with volume only, and draw what I thought price had done, and then the inverse: take charts with price only and draw the gaussians. Jack actually advised me to do this. Also, drawing each bar in real time by looking at volume only...did that for 2 weeks, bar by bar.

 

Expect this to be very frustrating at first, but very helpful...good luck!!

 

hth,

Vienna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I and several others seem to have fallen into a trap that I have recently become aware of.

 

I had been told that the method had changed considerably between the ET threads and this one, but I thought that was just in terms of concepts like “lateral movement” and “faster fractal traverse.” The reality is that the fractal concept is used in a drastically different way in the ET threads and is fundamentally incompatible with what is presented on TL. Trying to apply concepts from the ET threads to a TL conceptual foundation has been sadly counterproductive for me.

 

Spyder has explained several times that when he started futures, he was able to trade mostly intuitively without being fully aware of his thought processes. I believe that as the threads went on, he became more consciously aware of what he was doing subconsciously and refined his understanding of the price/volume relationship. Going back over the ET threads, I can see how Spyder’s explanations gradually shifted more towards what is presented on TL, with one of the largest pieces being a shift from defining traverses as having a visible retrace, meaning that a lower fractal level is visible, to being a distinct and consistent fractal level made up of containers that are one level smaller. Glancing back over this thread, I see that gucci also saw what I am seeing now. Learning to view the price/volume relationship as presented here on TL is comprehensive and complete. It is not lacking anything that you will find in the ET threads.

 

If one wishes to learn from the ET threads, I believe the best way to do that is to set aside the concepts of consistent and distinct fractal levels and follow those threads exactly as instructed, possibly preceding this by trading equities for a few years, as Spyder did.

 

Given that I believe what is laid out in this thread to be the pinnacle of Spyder’s understanding of markets, I have decided that starting from here and moving forward is the best path for me to follow. Anything that happened before 2009 is not something I will spend time on. I will follow exactly what is laid out early in this thread, looking at charts for similarities and differences that signal continuation or change on different levels of sentiment.

 

Begin with these smaller pieces and build from there. In such a fashion, you'll soon see how letters form words, and words become sentences. It is within these sentences that the market tells its story.

 

Before one can learn how to learn to thoroughly and correctly annotate a chart, one must learn the process of differentiation.

 

I believe that the ten cases are the metaphorical letters. I also note that Spyder has emphasized differentiating between them over annotating a chart. This process does not require perfectly annotated charts to begin.

 

I hope this helps others to decide exactly what course of action they want to take in order to reach their goals.

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.