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

romanus,

 

at 14:05 there is an IBGS that pierces the lateral formation, shouldn't this end the lateral?

 

--

thanks,

 

innersky

Aside from the issue of what does, and what doesn't end the lateral - the bar in question (14:05) seems to me to be different from any other bar that 'pierces' the lateral's boundary. Specifically, it opens outside of the lateral and closes inside it. I personally differentiate this type of context from the situation where bar would open inside the lateral. My observations (which are yet to be proven wrong by me) so far lead me to consider the type of bars that 14:05 represent to be the continuation of the lateral movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thursday, September 3, 2009.

 

Gets my vote... Ending the day in that DOM lateral still has me looking for PT2 confirmation on the 5M tape though :)

 

EDIT: Better double check my data provider on that one @ EOD (No LAT). Though personally, I am not comfortable calling 15:15 ET a PT2... So PFC has me looking for PT3 of tape then IBV to PT2 of traverse.

Edited by ehorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Were you just referring to "hold" with the reference to flaws, or something else?

 

Sorry for the delay in responding Ez - IMO, the segment had the appearance of non-dominance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thursday, September 3, 2009.

 

I have a question on your 5:15 - 15:30 pt2 to 3 retrace of a traverse. Is that because of the non-dom lateral, as this section doesn't have increasing volume?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Though personally, I am not comfortable calling 15:15 ET a PT2... So PFC has me looking for PT3 of tape then IBV to PT2 of traverse.

 

I have a question on your 5:15 - 15:30 pt2 to 3 retrace of a traverse. Is that because of the non-dom lateral, as this section doesn't have increasing volume?

 

IMO, the type of EH that developed on 15:15 - 15:20 bars, coupled with the accelerated down tape drawn to the 15:25 FBP, satisfies the requirements for a 5 m ES Level Traverse's retrace. EH, as I am observing, can be treated as a lateral tape, and in this context seems to fit as one.

 

That would put the Point Two of the accelerated traverse at 16:00 bar where my medium black increasing gaussian should have been ended, and medium decreasing red from that point forward. ( My last gaussian is drawn incorrectly - it should be medium decreasing red from 16:00 to EOD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMO, the type of EH that developed on 15:15 - 15:20 bars, coupled with the accelerated down tape drawn to the 15:25 FBP, satisfies the requirements for a 5 m ES Level Traverse's retrace. EH, as I am observing, can be treated as a lateral tape, and in this context seems to fit as one.

 

That would put the Point Two of the accelerated traverse at 16:00 bar where my medium black increasing gaussian should have been ended, and medium decreasing red from that point forward. ( My last gaussian is drawn incorrectly - it should be medium decreasing red from 16:00 to EOD)

I agree with the way you have it annotated, as it looks right. Though for different reasons. The tape acceleration is valid in certain circumstances, but I have a very similar example (to this) where it definitely isn't, so I appreciate this example for comparison purposes. Back to the charts for more review. Will keep in mind your view on the EH's and FBP's as well. Thanks - EZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with the way you have it annotated, as it looks right. Though for different reasons. The tape acceleration is valid in certain circumstances, but I have a very similar example (to this) where it definitely isn't, so I appreciate this example for comparison purposes.
Let me have a crack at it, if you don't mind.

 

Will keep in mind your view on the EH's and FBP's as well.
Obviously, the market indicated that the combo of EH lateral tape and FBP tape isn't sufficient for a 5 m ES Level Traverse's retrace. I don't think I missed any other factors that may influence the termination of medium B2B.

9_4_2009.thumb.png.2c2001be6e231891c7966de09247914a.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me have a crack at it, if you don't mind.

 

Obviously, the market indicated that the combo of EH lateral tape and FBP tape isn't sufficient for a 5 m ES Level Traverse's retrace. I don't think I missed any other factors that may influence the termination of medium B2B.

 

Caught that this morning too, my other reasons obviously didn't work out. I'll try to dig up that example for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...I don't think I missed any other factors that may influence the termination of medium B2B.

 

For my annotations, it took the day to complete medium B2B.

09042009.thumb.jpg.04de1d5fd7b172f31b7a6142e5fdfc7f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with romanus and ehorn that the first leg up is done. The termination was quick and clean as opposed to the schlock we have been wading through (as 5 min ES traders) for the past few days.

Edited by ljyoung
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me have a crack at it, if you don't mind.

 

Obviously, the market indicated that the combo of EH lateral tape and FBP tape isn't sufficient for a 5 m ES Level Traverse's retrace. I don't think I missed any other factors that may influence the termination of medium B2B.

 

Hi romanus,

Is it because point 2 of Medium Blue up Traverse overlapped with Medium Pink Down Traverse?

09_03_2009.thumb.gif.5a8235b5e6c37d1f75f9474854da5277.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi romanus,

Is it because point 2 of Medium Blue up Traverse overlapped with Medium Pink Down Traverse?

 

The close of the bar in question is NOT in the overlap zone. Look at Jack's CP4. It's all laid out there. How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi romanus,

Is it because point 2 of Medium Blue up Traverse overlapped with Medium Pink Down Traverse?

What is annotated in the snip as Point Two of the blue medium thickness Traverse is actually a point 2 of the tape. I am not sure what you mean by overlapped, but 15:15 breaks pink medium trendline and as such, I believe satisfies the necessary conditions for Point Two of the Traverse. However, what comes next, IMO, may define, what I have erroneously annotated with medium thickness blue trendlines, as just a tape. A retrace is formed by EH lateral tape and FBP tape. This, I suspect, could the reason for everything from 14:45 forward to EOD to be a tape and not a Traverse. However, I could be wrong, and the real issue may be somewhere else ( I can't exclude the 14:25 lateral from consideration). My comment about not missing other factors determining the termination of medium B2B was premature. Until I am able to locate a few examples that allow apple to apple comparison, the question whether or not a combo of EH lateral tape and FBP tape is suffiecient for a Traverse's retrace remains open for me.

 

P.S. As far as the comment about checking the volume, I'd be very beware of generalized suggestions which are not supported by tangible examples of contexts which lend themselves to 'apple to apple' comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... P.S. As far as the comment about checking the volume, I'd be very beware of generalized suggestions which are not supported by tangible examples of contexts which lend themselves to 'apple to apple' comparison.
Actually my suggestion was meant to be taken ad litteram. I know that one of the main factors that prevent most of the pupils of this method from breaking the profitability barrier is that they don't pay enough attention to volume.

 

I avoid giving direct advice, which would be my interpretation of Spydertrader's posts in light of my experience, because I think that for each one of us the best way to crack this method is to start from the source.

 

At two months from the starting of this thread my best advice to those who care to take it is to re-read all, and only, Spydertrader's posts here, paying attention to each word, not skipping but also not adding (inventing) anything. Spydertrader chooses very carefully his words, and only when "you know" you fully understand what he meant, and what he didn't mean. One example that comes to mind: "The market defines a Traverse based on Volume."

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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