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

Internal formations with increasing volume on second bar annotated.Ftp's and fbp's are annotated accordingly no matter what the second bar color.Sym's and eh's the annotation varies depending on color of second bar.hth

5aa711966ea98_symswithincvolume.thumb.PNG.4fa1873af589303eb6e719a204282b7b.PNG

5aa7119676761_ehswithincvolume.thumb.PNG.f9ef5855342c7f6c9524a6fa12cf9b6e.PNG

5aa71196d87cb_fbpwithincvolume.thumb.PNG.8f2ac5ccb74e963f662d0de630f0d13a.PNG

5aa71196e0b25_ftpswithincvolume.thumb.PNG.88be43a2ecdb39e7402de533da061299.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VE – Volatility Expansion(see attached) – ‘pushing out’ of the Left Trend Line refinement starts with the "zone" in this case the thicker trendline container's "zone"(see attached).Market needs a close on or beyond the ltl on the v.e. bar at bar close to be in the "zone"(see attached).hth

VE.jpg.fbdccbfe858a9023994af54b79da2a2c.jpg

5aa71196e96a1_VEZones.JPG.791a074b7e67da53e8d66589bba18ccd.JPG

5aa71196edffe_VEintheZONEexample.JPG.64c44ed77d3b8398360af6a1acb8b0b3.JPG

Edited by patrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be possible that, in the attached chart from jbarnby, the thin line I marked with "A" is the fanned version of the thin line marked with "B"?

 

Thanks, and a Happy New Year to everyone!

Heisenberg

traverse1fan.thumb.png.7ba9c487e0a6d085a32a1c3d9c4dc4d7.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would it be possible that, in the attached chart from jbarnby, the thin line I marked with "A" is the fanned version of the thin line marked with "B"?

 

Thanks, and a Happy New Year to everyone!

Heisenberg

 

I suggest you look at some of spyders charts. It looks like a different fractal

Edited by wilddog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suggest you look at some of spyders charts. It looks like a different fractal

 

Actually, Spyder never posted a fully annotated chart with only three fractals. Older charts from previous threads were annotated in a different fashion, and often contained much more than three fractals. Perhaps that's why he frequently encouraged folks to ONLY study this thread. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the trend (fractal) complete yet, or is there more to come? How would you know? Some of the best advice Spyder personally gave to me was to spend more time studying the volume pane of my chart. The trendlines tell us where our points reside, but the volume tells us what we've built.

010213.thumb.png.e057bde285672d7f5f3d23ecbf3e3c2d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the trend (fractal) complete yet, or is there more to come? How would you know? Some of the best advice Spyder personally gave to me was to spend more time studying the volume pane of my chart. The trendlines tell us where our points reside, but the volume tells us what we've built.

 

I'd say that the trend is not complete yet because we have a higher volume peak(volume increasing). First post of this thread: if Volume is increasing, then the Price Trend is continuing.

 

Heisenberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd say that the trend is not complete yet because we have a higher volume peak(volume increasing). First post of this thread: if Volume is increasing, then the Price Trend is continuing.

 

Heisenberg

 

Well hopefully you noted that the peak is around 1600 - nothing unusual there. But there are other ways of knowing. Sequences!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the trend (fractal) complete yet, or is there more to come? How would you know? Some of the best advice Spyder personally gave to me was to spend more time studying the volume pane of my chart. The trendlines tell us where our points reside, but the volume tells us what we've built.

 

I have the benefit of todays price action.

However, when reading your post before today opened my thoughts were this:

 

1. Yes there is more to come.

2. Assuming your green trend lines are a Tape, then we require a further 2r2b (thin) due to the Tape Ve'ing at 15.55 ?

 

But that's from price rather than volume ?

 

Thx for helping out here on TL..

 

Kind regards

 

PS: did you mean to have a B2B on top of a B2B of the same gaussian thickness at the start of your posted chart from 15.30 ?

Edited by FilterTip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the trend (fractal) complete yet, or is there more to come? How would you know? Some of the best advice Spyder personally gave to me was to spend more time studying the volume pane of my chart. The trendlines tell us where our points reside, but the volume tells us what we've built.

 

So if I read this correctly, this is what you do:

 

a. Draw the 3 containers

b. Draw the 3 corresponding gaussians

c. Now you can see from the volume pane what fractal you've built

 

Heisenberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if I read this correctly, this is what you do:

 

a. Draw the 3 containers

b. Draw the 3 corresponding gaussians

c. Now you can see from the volume pane what fractal you've built

 

Heisenberg

 

Well, honestly it's quite a bit more involved than that, but i suppose that's a good place to start. There are many other considerations as well, and one must understand the concept of nesting the fractals too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the trend (fractal) complete yet, or is there more to come? How would you know? Some of the best advice Spyder personally gave to me was to spend more time studying the volume pane of my chart. The trendlines tell us where our points reside, but the volume tells us what we've built.
A slightly different view (green and purple RTLs and gaussians, orange laterals).

5aa7119916cfc_010213jbarnbyschart.png.c899795eff3e98c72fa21bca09270f8e.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, honestly it's quite a bit more involved than that, but i suppose that's a good place to start. There are many other considerations as well, and one must understand the concept of nesting the fractals too.

 

Yes I'm aware that it's not that simple, but can you start from that concept?

I'm not sure I correctly understand what the concept of nesting fractals is. Is it enough to say that, for example, a channel contains 3 traverses, and each traverse contains 3 tapes?

 

Sidenote: from what I see in your charts, there aren't always 3 tapes? Sometimes a single tape seems enough.

 

Heisenberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I'm aware that it's not that simple, but can you start from that concept?

I'm not sure I correctly understand what the concept of nesting fractals is. Is it enough to say that, for example, a channel contains 3 traverses, and each traverse contains 3 tapes?

 

Sidenote: from what I see in your charts, there aren't always 3 tapes? Sometimes a single tape seems enough.

 

Heisenberg

 

There was good discussion in this thread in Oct 2010 about nesting. Additionally, pace can influence how a fractal is constructed, and what is observable vs what is not observable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Take a look at the attached Chart snip from today (08/04/2009) ...

 

What did the market form?

How do you know?

 

If you know neither answer ...

 

How many different ways can you annotate the chart snippet? Test to determine which of those ways represent the only correct method.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=12707&stc=1&d=1249433003

This is a nice annotation drill to check your fractal jumping propensity :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a nice annotation drill to check your fractal jumping propensity :)

 

Take a look at the attached Chart snip from today (08/04/2009) ...

 

What did the market form?

How do you know?

 

If you know neither answer ...

 

How many different ways can you annotate the chart snippet? Test to determine which of those ways represent the only correct method.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=12707&stc=1&d=1249433003

 

 

How, using this chart snippet would you, as you say, check your fractal jumping propensity ?

 

Spyder replied, at the time to Ezzy:

Originally Posted by Ezzy »

So it wasn't necessarily about the snippet (in a vacuum). It was the bigger picture, what came before it should have told us WMCN.

 

with:

 

That which developed before the snippet told you, in the most unambiguous way possible, what the snippet would be.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Thx

Edited by FilterTip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jbarnby

re your post# 3708:

 

Is the trend (fractal) complete yet, or is there more to come? How would you know? Some of the best advice Spyder personally gave to me was to spend more time studying the volume pane of my chart. The trendlines tell us where our points reside, but the volume tells us what we've built.

 

As previously posted, would this be correct ?

 

 

1. Yes there is more to come.

2. Assuming your green trend lines are a Tape, then we require a further 2r2b (thin) due to the Tape Ve'ing at 15.55 ?

 

But that's from price rather than volume ?

 

Thx for helping out here on TL..

 

Kind regards

 

 

Many thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How, using this chart snippet would you, as you say, check your fractal jumping propensity ?

 

Spyder replied, at the time to Ezzy:

 

 

with:

 

 

 

Thx

By testing if one can correctly identify the exact bar that ends the medium line down container in real time, without having the benefit of seeing what followed.

One can correctly annotate the snippet (the medium line down container), without knowing what happened before it started. I believe that in his reply Spydertrater was saying that one can anticipate that the snippet won't accelerate down and its dominance by analyzing the context, and he didn't say that the snippet cannot be annotated without the benefit of more information than what he originally posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it an up traverse like this?

 

Heisenberg

No it is a down traverse. Follow the link to Spydertrader's post for the discussion of the drill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally Posted by Heisenberg »

Is it an up traverse like this?

 

Heisenberg

 

No it is a down traverse. Follow the link to Spydertrader's post for the discussion of the drill.

 

Reading through the posts for that discussion:

 

ehorn thought it was a down Tape:

romanus thought it was a down Traverse:

cnms2 thought it was a down Channel:

 

Spyder infers (only by referring to what came before the posted chart)

that it was a down Tape. to the 15.35 bar, from which we get the last 2B up Tape

to complete an up Traverse.

 

I stand corrected if I've mis-understood those series of past posts.

 

Thx

 

PS: logic would suggest that one would need to have known how to correctly annotate the "thing" prior to the chart in question in order to have correctly annotated the chart in question etc..etc.. !

Edited by FilterTip

Share this post


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

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • How's about other crypto exchanges? Are all they banned in your country or only Binance?
    • 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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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