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

... I'll continue to re read the 2009, instructions, ...

 

The quote below was addressed to me, but you may find it useful as well. The 2nd half of '08 IR contains some discussions which may be helpful in achieving the consistency of gaussian annotations.

 

"Your current 'view' of the market as transitioning from increasing to decreasing to increasing again (in terms of Volume) doesn't provide the most accurate interpretation. Instead, monitor from the standpoint of dominant to non-dominant and back to dominant again.

 

Use the Gaussians as an 'indicator' of dominance in order to have them 'match' the trend lines. On many of my charts, the non-dominant portion of the Gaussians do not have the same color as the Volume bars tracked. In other words, the Gaussian lines track dominant vs non-dominant Price Movement, rather than Volume bar coloration. The subtle difference often sits where one finds the market 'mode'.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader"

 

10-04-08 12:40 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The questions I am asking are not the right ones, or I am not able to see the correct answer at this point.

So I think for the benefit of others, I'll continue to re read the 2009, instructions, and abstain from posting on this thread.

 

- Monkman

 

Your questions are very helpful as I am also struggling with many of the same issues. Please continue to post so we can all accelerate our learning together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wednesday 26 August 2009 - somewhere between 10:20 and noon I got lost...then at 13:00 followed the b2b 2r 2b pattern and worked my way back. Still trying to figure out whether it was the correct market's view.

es-09Aug26-2.thumb.jpg.30267349e0fedecaa2e38807ec007e04.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've annotated some areas differently.

 

Thank you, very interesting! Will you also share what your tape gaussians looks like in that area please? I was struggling somewhat trying to build the tape gaussians into the traverse ones.

Edited by rs5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, very interesting! Will you also share what your tape gaussians looks like in that area please? I was struggling somewhat trying to build the tape gaussians into the traverse ones.
My L1 gaussians for that area.

more.gif.46eecb36e39eaf5107044140f9b9c026.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've annotated some areas differently.

 

 

Thank you for feedback. The reason I annotated the green up channel was because I had three traverses contained within channel. First the clearly dminant up traverse, then the non-dominant traverse on decreasing volume, then the up traverse on lower volume, but the black volume was slightly more than the red within the traverse. 1,2,3, sequence complete, look for change, which is exactly what happened cause the green up channel FTT'ed at 12:15 on increasing black volume. However, the red down channel started from an FTT of the blue up traverse at 10:30, not from the FTT of the green up channel I had annotated. Sooooo, I can see your point about there really not being a up channel associated with that. I'm still learning here so I really appreciate the comments.

Thank you.:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daily chart volume: looks like finishing 2r leg then 2b to come?

 

Hey rs5. Not that it's particularly of consequence but my thanks to you was occasioned by not enough sleep and pressing the wrong icon:doh:. In any case your original interpretation though not unreasonable was erroneous but you already know that. If I might be so bold as to suggest that if you can determine why the FTT at 13:20 on 8-26 was faux for a traverse completion while the FTT at 11:05 on 8-27 was not, then deciphering the myriad of x2x2y2x sequences may become more straightforward. IMO, rigorous attention to how one draws one's tapes and hence constructs one's channel lines can facilitate the correct deconvolution of the Gaussians. The two are inextricably linked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is this the R2R B2 R2 sequence that Spydertrader is illustrating?

 

What you show looks like the right sequence. But perhaps someone who knows can comment on that also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey rs5. Not that it's particularly of consequence but my thanks to you was occasioned by not enough sleep and pressing the wrong icon:doh:. In any case your original interpretation though not unreasonable was erroneous but you already know that.

 

Perhaps it was subconscious? :) To remove a Thank you simply look to the right of the Thank you and press the "Remove" button.

 

BTW that chart you are referring to is a daily chart. Which error are you referring to please?

 

If I might be so bold as to suggest that if you can determine why the FTT at 13:20 on 8-26 was faux for a traverse completion while the FTT at 11:05 on 8-27 was not, then deciphering the myriad of x2x2y2x sequences may become more straightforward. IMO, rigorous attention to how one draws one's tapes and hence constructs one's channel lines can facilitate the correct deconvolution of the Gaussians. The two are inextricably linked.

 

Do you mean that on 8/26 price bounced off the RTL, but on 8/27 it broke out of the RTL? If not, please provide a snippet to illustrate your thought.

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.