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

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?

 

 

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.

 

No. Definitely sleep deficit which admittedly can be a pathway to previously unexplored realms of the mind. In fact I was thinking of your 8-26 chart.

 

Which RTL are you speaking of, aside from which such an event [bounce - no bounce] sounds like a consequence of something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Friday, August 28, 2009

 

Hi romanus and all friends who are interested in Price and Volume Relationship,

 

The attached chart (annotated by romanus) shows the point 3 of the pink ES 5 Min Traverse located within the 2nd Dominant Srquence. Normally, point 3 should be laid inside or partially inside the Non-Dominant (retrace) trendlines. Are there any trendlines missed on the chart? Or, gaussians should be placed differently?

 

I have tried many different ways for annotating this chart; but, no satisfied solution came out yet. Would you offer your suggestion please? TIA

5aa70f1b463cc_romanus_point3_08282009.thumb.gif.9f12644c24d0a009aab5ffafe1c93c8f.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... Normally, point 3 should be laid inside or partially inside the Non-Dominant (retrace) trendlines. ...

IMO, the highlighted doesn't appear to accurately describe the necessary and sufficient conditions for "geometrical" Point 3. E.g. attached context.

5aa70f1b50e82_8_24_2009(5Min).thumb.png.d6d7556b9cef5239d49afe7d08f075ce.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi romanus and all friends who are interested in Price and Volume Relationship,

 

The attached chart (annotated by romanus) shows the point 3 of the pink ES 5 Min Traverse located within the 2nd Dominant Srquence. Normally, point 3 should be laid inside or partially inside the Non-Dominant (retrace) trendlines. Are there any trendlines missed on the chart? Or, gaussians should be placed differently?

 

I have tried many different ways for annotating this chart; but, no satisfied solution came out yet. Would you offer your suggestion please? TIA

There's nothing wrong in drawing it this way. Is there?

5aa70f1b5b877_romanus_point203_08282009.thumb.gif.39fee296dec3585e88a61a5393cc1be7.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's nothing wrong in drawing it this way. Is there?

 

Thank you cnms2 for your suggestion. Bars A,B,C, D & E after point 3 (circled) are not inside the pink heavy trendline . How do you handle these 5 bars? TIA

5aa70f1b6496a_cnms2annotation.thumb.gif.36a55fe9675dbcfc3a28675b31e67a4f.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you cnms2 for your suggestion. Bars A,B,C, D & E after point 3 (circled) are not inside the pink heavy trendline . How do you handle these 5 bars? TIA
In the spirit of this thread: what do you think are the reasons to hold / reverse / exit in each of those cases?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's nothing wrong in drawing it this way. Is there?

 

If, in order to change at a bigger fractal we must COMPLETE a sequence at a faster fractal, then, yes there is something wrong in drawing this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that identify the sequences, and drawing the TLs becomes very difficult on low volulme. It seems several flaw start to form at this point making it a difficult MA process for me. Attached is my chart from the AM.

5aa70f1bc3233_8-31-2009ESam2.thumb.jpg.34747ca912047ce8e7a24411fe78d24a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find that identify the sequences, ...
Your 15:05 bar from Fri is black. You got to fix your bar coloring - doing so will alert you to the fact that your medium R2R doesn't have any decreasing red colume bars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the annotation drill snippet (across the first 9 bars) we go:

 

Stitch

FBP

OB

FTP

FBP

OB

 

What do we know about flaws?

 

@ 14:10 we begin moving up:

 

First bar DBV

Second Bar DBV

 

Is there something about tapes TO DV?

 

IBV does show up at 14:20...

 

How does it form?

 

 

If I review the sequences through here - I can only conclude one correct way to annotate this snippet which applies to every other thing on the same fractal.

 

Were you just referring to "hold" with the reference to flaws, or something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
romanus,

 

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

 

--

thanks,

 

innersky

 

It should, but it doesn't. What does that tell you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It should, but it doesn't. What does that tell you?

 

Assuming that you are right about the fact that the lateral continues here, it means that an IBGS that pierces a lateral does not always ends it. (perhaps it must pierce it on the RTL to be a lateral killer?)

 

--

innersky

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.