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

Now, you do not really need me to confirm the answer, do you?:) Now all that remains for you is to go deeper into details and thoroughly annotate all of the sequences of that thing. After that you can start thinking about how could one know earlier that the market changed dominance. Look very closely at what transpired on each and every bar. Regardless of what I or Spyder or anyone else might say, the market has spoken.

 

Gucci, yes actually I really do need you to confirm the correct answer. The market has spoken, but for me right now it speaks in a language that I do not fully understand. So to have you or Spyder confirm what the correct answer is would go a long way to help all of us move closer to fully understanding what the market is saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, you do not really need me to confirm the answer, do you?:) Now all that remains for you is to go deeper into details and thoroughly annotate all of the sequences of that thing. After that you can start thinking about how could one know earlier that the market changed dominance. Look very closely at what transpired on each and every bar. Regardless of what I or Spyder or anyone else might say, the market has spoken.

 

Hi Gucci,

 

When studying the chart under discussion, in real time I would have probably taken the (15:35) IBGS on increasing volume, which is also a lateral BO/FBO, as a major signal for change. (This would have been too early as it turns out).

 

Then I thought of this previous quote of yours in response to a post.

 

"The market moved to its point 2 (first dominant leg) creating the faster fractal thing underway. Such being the case you should anticipate the second dominant leg (2R) being created the similar way. So annotating REAL TIME at 10:25 (your provisional point 3)you anticipate the second dominant leg. This second dominant leg should be created by a faster fractal thing. So there is no way you should look for a signal of change at 10:30-10:40 area. Now try to work forward from here using the same logic in conjuction with volume sequences and you will also understand why we do not have a faster fractal thing annotated from 10:25 onward. (see the chart with the clue)"

 

Would a similar argument apply here. The 15:35 IBGS cannot be a signal for change because the faster fractal sequence of the second dominant leg (2R) has not completed yet. We can only start looking for a signal for change after the 15:45 bar (the faster fractal sequence for the second dominant leg of the pink container is now complete), and that signal for change comes on the very next bar in the form of another increasing volume ibgs/ob?

 

I hope I am on the right track.:)

Drill2.thumb.jpg.3fffc1cfbdd1480fe6310799ccf08bda.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gucci, yes actually I really do need you to confirm the correct answer. The market has spoken, but for me right now it speaks in a language that I do not fully understand. So to have you or Spyder confirm what the correct answer is would go a long way to help all of us move closer to fully understanding what the market is saying.

 

Ok. Now we are at the heart of the whole stuff. Just imagine me saying no. Just imagine me telling you, you are not correct. What would it be able to change?

 

Your confidence.

 

And why? Because you still do not understand that the market IS the final arbitrary judge.

 

The Spyder laid out ALL of the bricks one needs to build a house. Use them...

 

Enjoy the process.

 

How many languages do you speak?

 

Were you ever frustrated by recognizing that you actually do not understant a lot of stuff presented in a languange you are trying to learn, after you just finished learning the alphabet? Why not?

 

Learning to trade isn't any different than learning a language, Only this time you learn the language of the market.

Enjoy.thumb.jpg.38de04392f3f246d6181e496b01c36db.jpg

Edited by gucci

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who could have known, the news was coming.;)

 

Hi Gucci,

 

I was very encouraged by your response to my last post ... getting there ...:)

 

I am also still trying to learn the language of the market.

 

A previous quote ...

 

"The market moved to its point 2 (first dominant leg) creating the faster fractal thing underway. Such being the case you should anticipate the second dominant leg (2R) being created in a similar way."

 

I am trying to see how this quote applies to the blue container in your chart (attached) from 12:30 to 13:50.

 

On the attached chart I have annotated on the Gaussian how I see the faster fractal b2b2r2b which forms the traverse B2B. We then have the traverse 2R, (which does not break the rtl, and therefore the rtl is not formed by the point 3 of price), but then I don't see the second dominant leg (2B) being created in the same way as the first dominant leg; I can't see the faster fractal here.

 

Any help in understanding the language of the market would be appreciated.

5aa7104b76a4d_DaxDec2.2.thumb.jpg.bd14368df0b9b82270d3499afb702aee.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... On the attached chart I have annotated on the Gaussian how I see the faster fractal b2b2r2b which forms the traverse B2B.

 

... Any help in understanding the language of the market would be appreciated.

I believe the faster fractal b2b2r2b ends at 13:00, forming the B2B, and reaching PT2. Then a lateral starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the faster fractal b2b2r2b ends at 13:00, forming the B2B, and reaching PT2. Then a lateral starts.

 

Thanks so much for your response cnms2.

 

Would the attached gaussian annotations, (fraster fractal and traverse) be more accurate?

5aa7104baa3d1_DaxDec2.4.thumb.jpg.0e19587c9bea2a7bc261bd7d06a4215d.jpg

Edited by 203NG
Attach picture

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks so much for your response cnms2.

 

Would the attached gaussian annotations, (fraster fractal and traverse) be more accurate?

 

It looks like the dominant 2B ended 1325 followed by a r2r pt 2 at 1335. followed by non-dominant lateral that ended at 1400.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks like the dominant 2B ended 1325 followed by a r2r pt 2 at 1335. followed by non-dominant lateral that ended at 1400.

 

Hi emac

 

According to my understanding, if you have a faster fractal b2b2r2b establishing the first dominant leg of a traverse (B2B) and taking you to the traverse point 2 (as here according to cnms2), then you should anticipate a similar volume sequence (b2r2b) in the second dominant leg of the traverse (from the traverse point 3). As this second volume sequence has not completed at 1325, I don't think that your r2r is valid as this implies change in dominance and we don't have permission to look for change until the faster fractal volume sequence of the 2B (from point 3) is complete.

 

I have tried annotating some more faster fractal traverses.

 

What I find interesting is that after the blue traverse container under discussion, the R2R annotated does not consist of a faster fractal r2r2b2r (at least not one that I can see). It is as if the market "jumps fractals" - I seem to recall Gucci using that phase:)

 

But this is followed by a faster fractal r2b2r for the second dominant leg 2R (from point 3).

5aa7104c99207_DaxDec2.6.thumb.jpg.22284402583836d7bb9d1f271538e62f.jpg

Edited by 203NG
attach chart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi emac

 

According to my understanding, if you have a faster fractal b2b2r2b establishing the first dominant leg of a traverse (B2B) and taking you to the traverse point 2 (as here according to cnms2), then you should anticipate a similar volume sequence (b2r2b) in the second dominant leg of the traverse (from the traverse point 3). As this second volume sequence has not completed at 1325, I don't think that your r2r is valid as this implies change in dominance and we don't have permission to look for change until the faster fractal volume sequence of the 2B (from point 3) is complete.

 

I have tried annotating some more faster fractal traverses.

 

What I find interesting is that after the blue traverse container under discussion, the R2R annotated does not consist of a faster fractal r2r2b2r (at least not one that I can see). It is as if the market "jumps fractals" - I seem to recall Gucci using that phase:)

 

But this is followed by a faster fractal r2b2r for the second dominant leg 2R (from point 3).

 

Hi 203NG,

 

Thanks for the notes. This is how I see it though working on the bar dominance and sequence. I see completion at 1325 that created the point 3 for the thick red channel. The B2B broke the pink traverse and point 2 of the blue traverse created from lateral retrace at 1315.

 

emac

5aa7104cadf1a_DaxDec2.2.thumb.jpg.0b6a38eba660b3c8e55acf055785ce11.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi gucci,

 

i was very encouraged by your response to my last post ... Getting there ...:)

 

i am also still trying to learn the language of the market.

 

A previous quote ...

 

"the market moved to its point 2 (first dominant leg) creating the faster fractal thing underway. Such being the case you should anticipate the second dominant leg (2r) being created in a similar way."

 

i am trying to see how this quote applies to the blue container in your chart (attached) from 12:30 to 13:50.

 

On the attached chart i have annotated on the gaussian how i see the faster fractal b2b2r2b which forms the traverse b2b. We then have the traverse 2r, (which does not break the rtl, and therefore the rtl is not formed by the point 3 of price), but then i don't see the second dominant leg (2b) being created in the same way as the first dominant leg; i can't see the faster fractal here.

 

Any help in understanding the language of the market would be appreciated.

 

hth..............................................

 

The troughs are a bit off, but you still will be able to see the pattern.

5aa7104cb65d6_Trythis.thumb.jpg.0260f1b5c790869c6fa1049d8b4dd05c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hth..............................................

 

The troughs are a bit off, but you still will be able to see the pattern.

 

Here is the "precise" version.

Version.thumb.jpg.f527dbe7965ebc507fe9dd8b891f164d.jpg

Edited by gucci

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is the "precise" version.

 

Thanks, Gucci for the chart. I totally forgot that point 2 must be outside the previous RTL and hence my earlier R2R was invalidated with the traverse ending 1350.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to be getting the Hershey videos and materials set up on Torrent. If someone wants to help with the seeding and trial run send me a PM.

 

Thanks - EZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is certain that volume action always precede price action. Volume itself is so much significant and in my own viewing, I will say it is the real price.

 

Whether there will be price movement or not, there must first be a mover, the backbone of any transaction being made, that's the power of Volume at work. So, if you want to enjoy the smooth ride of the trend, you may need watch the magnitude of the volume. That is usually the push behind price actions.

 

It is also true that if volume soars, then price is likely to soar and if volume falls, price is likely to fall. This is not 100% the case anyway, it is only a guiding rule. Specific actions must be taken to monitor the current trend.

 

Is Volume trading most likely suitable for scalping trades?

I suppose it should be better suitable for swing trading as it should be easier to spot a good trend when there is a price rally for some few days and this may be best seen on larger timeframes.

 

In shorter time frames when there is likely to be a trend exhaustion, there is most likely going to be a snap in volume - a sharp drop in volume magnitudes. When this happens, that is a likely signal that price may presently be changing directions.

 

These days, we experience higher Volumes than previous years. That is to help see that Volume is the real price as it reveals the actual market volatility levels which can also strongly determine global economic conditions.

 

Master your volume indicators and compare with price actions. Changes in volume determines changes in price.

 

 

(URL removed for now)

 

To your trading success.

Aden

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.