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.

# The Price / Volume Relationship

## Recommended Posts

In the chart that I posted for every line drawn in volume pane (gaussian) there exist a corresponding pair of lines (trendlines) drawn in price pane. The relationship between those two ( namely a pair of trendlines and gausisan line) can be described using the verb "match". Where do you see the contradiction between your premise ("...the gaussian lines should ALWAYS match the trendlines...") and what is drawn?

There is maybe no contradiction but probably more a knowledge gap on my side. I look at your chart and I see your blue channel. I see where you probably put your points 1, 2 and 3. Then I look at the the gaussians (the thicker ones) below. There I see b2b = point one to point two. The 2b part of this b2b is not where I see point two (which of course can be wrong). Then it goes 2r which should be point 3 of that channel. But it seems that point 3 comes later. I hope this description helps.

Greetings.

##### Share on other sites

I appreciate the renewed interest in the thread (very thought provoking), thought I'd post a chart.

##### Share on other sites
I appreciate the renewed interest in the thread (very thought provoking), thought I'd post a chart.

Can you please clarify what "PFC", "m1" and "m2" mean?

Thanks.

##### Share on other sites
Can you please clarify what "PFC", "m1" and "m2" mean?

Thanks.

I can help you there. Pre Flight Check, and Move1 and Move2

##### Share on other sites
One more lateral that meets current topic.

Differentiation

Context

Order of events

I would say more bars are needed before the laterals to know which direction both of these laterals will exit.

If the first bar (bar before the lateral) of both laterals are PT1s, then you know the laterals are retraces from PT2 to PT3 and the price will exit in the same direction as PT3.

But if the first bar of the laterals are after PT3 and hence the up cycle is complete, the direction of price will be depending on the order of events inside the laterals.

Edited by sambrown

##### Share on other sites
There is maybe no contradiction but probably more a knowledge gap on my side. I look at your chart and I see your blue channel. I see where you probably put your points 1, 2 and 3. Then I look at the the gaussians (the thicker ones) below. There I see b2b = point one to point two. The 2b part of this b2b is not where I see point two (which of course can be wrong). Then it goes 2r which should be point 3 of that channel. But it seems that point 3 comes later. I hope this description helps.

Greetings.

My view. .

##### Share on other sites
There is maybe no contradiction but probably more a knowledge gap on my side. I look at your chart and I see your blue channel. I see where you probably put your points 1, 2 and 3. Then I look at the the gaussians (the thicker ones) below. There I see b2b = point one to point two. The 2b part of this b2b is not where I see point two (which of course can be wrong). Then it goes 2r which should be point 3 of that channel. But it seems that point 3 comes later. I hope this description helps.

Greetings.

I could be mistaken, but I am going to assume that your "operational definition" of Point Two is the location on the price pane where the LTL touches the price bar. And personally, as far as the definitions go in general, confusing the definition with an assumption is what gets me in trouble all the time.

##### Share on other sites
I appreciate the renewed interest in the thread (very thought provoking), thought I'd post a chart.
I don't think those are m1-m2, but a three move retrace.

##### Share on other sites
I wonder why the 1540-1555 can't be considered as b2b2r2b on some super-extra-fast level?

Yes there can. Didn't try to do them all, ran out of line weights. For example another one starting at 12:55.

But I not convinced that the one added at the end of day 15:55 still needs 2 more legs. Though it certainly appears to. It may be finished and we can't see it at this level, and the last bar of the day is change. We'll know Monday.

There are blue markers where the gaussian sequences come together. The finishing leg of the smaller fractal is drawn in. Usually you don't "see" that finishing leg as it gets absorbed into the 2nd half of the R2R or B2B. It makes annotating cleaner when it's absorbed, but there are still some people who have confusion on how they sync, or come together. So seeing it drawn this way may be of help.

##### Share on other sites
In this image is a lateral. This should be one that fits the the current topic.

Can the direction of this lateral exit be known with just the information shown ?

is there enough information here for . . .

1) Differentiation

2) Context

3) Order of events

This is for anyone who wants to answer any or all questions.

additionally . . . Spyder, could you just give a yes or no to each question here if possible ?

EDIT: All bars are finished, none are forming

Using snippets this short, much of the context and order of events is missing. It is really only useful for differentiating the object.

##### Share on other sites
Using snippets this short, much of the context and order of events is missing. It is really only useful for differentiating the object.

I agree, although is it possible to use a small amount of data to determine? This is to see what amount of information is needed to identify a lateral and understand a laterals direction. Understandably, the greater amount of information available, the better one can identify . . . but just how little the info available can still be enough to properly identify.

This is the first lateral I posted that conforms to Spyder's drill with a small addition of information.

With this additional info, do we have enough for

1) Differentiation

2) Context

3) Order of events

Anyone is welcome to comment.

##### Share on other sites

This is the second lateral I posted that conforms to Spyder's drill.

Enough info to identify the lateral ?

Remember these are not trick questions. This is only to review just how little information is enough to identify the lateral.

##### Share on other sites
Of course you looked for increasing Volume to confirm your Point Three, but what you failed to note was that the context was different here. Price found itself inside a Lateral. In such a case, the failure of the market to provide that which you anticipate is in fact, the signal for change.

I believe Jack used to call it, "What wasn't that?"

Again, the whole point of the exercise is for a trader to learn how to know which direction Price must head as it exits the Lateral.

HTH.

(all spyders comments in blue are highlighted to point out importance of his post )

In this example the lateral was properly differentiated, but the error was in the context.

So as we analyze each step to determine the direction of the lateral exit, the difficulty increases.

This is a work to know what a sufficient data set is to determine what kind of lateral has developed, and which direction it must exit the lateral.

Differntiation- easy enough, compare the developing lateral to known lateral builds.

Context - a little more complex with careful analysis- analyze the lateral and all the data it is forming in.

Order of events- Highest complexity requiring very careful analysis of the sequential order.

This is where the greatest potential for error can be. Critical to properly know where in the sequential order the lateral is forming and what must come next.

wording

##### Share on other sites

Later today I will post the complete days the two laterals were chosen from.

##### Share on other sites
Of course you looked for increasing Volume to confirm your Point Three, but what you failed to note was that the context was different here. Price found itself inside a Lateral. In such a case, the failure of the market to provide that which you anticipate is in fact, the signal for change........

Hi Spyder and all.

I'm having real trouble reconciling the above in bold.

By "anticipate", (in this respect we are "anticipating" increasing black volume to tell us we have the 2b of b2b2r2b) are we talking about WMCN in terms of the volume sequence that must complete, yes or no ?

Until this question is answered as "no", let us "presume" the answer is "yes".

So how are we to deal with the M in WMCN when you say that we had it by virtue of it not happening.?

You do state

that the context was different here. Price found itself inside a Lateral.
.

I can only deduce, from what you say, that if price finds itself within a lateral then WMCN may not apply?

Edited by FilterTip

##### Share on other sites
Later today I will post the complete days the two laterals were chosen from.
Maybe the lack of response to your drill is due to the weekend break, and you should leave it open until people have more time to think about it, and express opinions. Most of us aren't yet able to anticipate correctly how a lateral will develop from 4, 5 or more bars, but everybody could try to annotate it and make observations about each bar's volume, price, closing, about groups of bars, trends, etc.. Not knowing what follows has the advantage of keeping us ... honest

##### Share on other sites
There is maybe no contradiction but probably more a knowledge gap on my side. I look at your chart and I see your blue channel. I see where you probably put your points 1, 2 and 3. Then I look at the the gaussians (the thicker ones) below. There I see b2b = point one to point two. The 2b part of this b2b is not where I see point two (which of course can be wrong). Then it goes 2r which should be point 3 of that channel. But it seems that point 3 comes later. I hope this description helps.

Greetings.

Hi frenchfry,

This chart is specially for you. HTH

Edited by NYCMB

##### Share on other sites
you should leave it open until people have more time to think about it, and express opinions.

Sounds good. I will leave it all week and when everyone is ready the complete charts will be posted

##### Share on other sites

I'm having real trouble reconciling the above in bold.

When presented with a situation (problem) where no clear solutions appears to exist, I often encourage people to look at said situation from an alternative point of view.

By "anticipate", (in this respect we are "anticipating" increasing black volume to tell us we have the 2b of b2b2r2b) are we talking about WMCN in terms of the volume sequence that must complete, yes or no ?

Yes.

So how are we to deal with the M in WMCN when you say that we had it by virtue of it not happening.?

I can only deduce, from what you say, that if price finds itself within a lateral then WMCN may not apply?

No.

##### Share on other sites

With respect to:

I can only deduce, from what you say, that if price finds itself within a lateral then WMCN may not apply?

No

is it correct to conclude the following;

1) that by price being within a lateral we have permission to look at the YM?

2) and in doing so then the lateral is both the object and the context?

3) and if so that the YM is to be included in the information we are using, in order to know which way price will exit a lateral?

Thx

Edited by FilterTip

##### Share on other sites

is it correct to conclude the following;

1) that by price being within a lateral we have permission to look at the YM?

No.

2) and in doing so then the lateral is both the object and the context?

No.

3) and if so that the YM is to be included in the information we are using, in order to know which way price will exit a lateral?

No.

##### Share on other sites

Hmmm...

I'm not following then because what you say (in bold)

"Of course you looked for increasing Volume to confirm your Point Three, but what you failed to note was that the context was different here.Price found itself inside a Lateral. In such a case, the failure of the market to provide that which you anticipate is in fact, the signal for change........"

This does imply that it is the lateral that is the context does it not?

With respect to your "hint to take a look at the YM",

there obviously must be a reason to do so.

Is it that we are given permission to look at the YM because price (in this instance) was in a formation (a Sym at 9:45 and indeed followed by a FBP) rather than just a lateral?

This is all in respect of:

"So how are we to deal with the M in WMCN when you say that we had it by virtue of it not happening.?"

Without a resolution to which, I'm finding it difficult to know when I should still anticipate a part of the volume sequence to complete or whether it has done so by not completing.

Thx..

##### Share on other sites
This does imply that it is the lateral that is the context does it not?

No.

With respect to your "hint to take a look at the YM",

there obviously must be a reason to do so.

Yes.

Is it that we are given permission to look at the YM because price (in this instance) was in a formation (a Sym at 9:45 and indeed followed by a FBP) rather than just a lateral?

No.

##### Share on other sites
Later today I will post the complete days the two laterals were chosen from.

Thanks for the drills TIKI.

I will take a shot at the first lateral.

##### Share on other sites

Hello cnms2 and NYCMB,

thank you far taking some of your time and your efforts! And of course thanks to TIKI but at the moment I need a break from hammering myself with laterals. :-)

cnms2 and NYCMB, your channels/containers seem to be identical. However with your annotation cnms2 I'm not too sure what you are trying to tell me. Are you saying those gaussians below are correct? If so here is what blocks me: In my world b2b2r mean point 1 to point two to point 3. Which means I have a container with three points. But at the moment I don't see a container which belongs to those gaussians. I see you try to show me to which "segment" the 2r part belongs but then point two is in the wrong place?

This is maybe where NYCMB comes into play with what he calls "Real p2". Real point 2? What's that? Is my first reaction. :-) If I draw a channel (or should I say container), then at the beginning I define where my point 1, 2 and 3 are. Everything that follows thereafter either must be an FTT... well... now I have to think... or a VE with a new point two(?). But the bar which you marked with 47 to me looks more like an FTT (and cnms2 seems to confirm it) of your dotted green container not a VE with a new point two. But at the end I could also be wrong.

##### Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.

• 0
• -1
• -1
• -1
• -1
• ### Posts

• CARDANO PRICE EXPOSES TO \$0.98 SUPPORT LEVEL ADA Price Analysis – January 25 When the sellers increase their momentum to push down price below \$0.98, the support level of \$0.83 and \$0.73 may be tested. In case the Support level of \$0.98 holds, the buyers may push up the price towards \$1.11, \$1.30 and \$1.46 levels. ADA/USD Market Key Levels: Resistance levels: \$1.11, \$1.30, \$1.46 Support levels: \$0.98, \$0.83, \$0.73 ADA/USD Long-term Trend: Bearish Cardano is bearish on daily chart. Buyers and sellers are struggling over the crypto. The sellers are trying to overpower the buyers. Former support level of \$1.30 and \$1.11 has been penetrated downside by the sellers and the price exposes to \$0.98 support level. There is tendency for the price to decline further if the sellers maintain their pressure. ADAUSD Daily chart, January 25 Cardano has crossed the two EMAs downside, currently trading below the 9 periods EMA and 21 periods EMA at distance which indicate a bearish movement. When the sellers increase their momentum to push down price below \$0.98, the support level of \$0.83 and \$0.73 may be tested. In case the Support level of \$0.98 holds, the buyers may push up the price towards \$1.11, \$1.30 and \$1.46 levels. The relative Strength Index period 14 is at 40 levels with the signal line pointing downside which indicates sell signal. ADA/USD Medium-term Trend: Bearish Cardano is on the bearish movement on 4-hour chart. The bullish movement could not continue when the buyers pushed up Cardano to test the resistance level at \$1.64. The bears reacted against the price increase with the formation of bearish engulfing candle. The price started decreasing and the support level of \$1.30 is broken downside. Further price decrease envisaged as the price is below the two dynamic resistance levels. ADAUSD 4-hour chart, January 25 The price is trading below the 9 periods EMA and 21 periods EMA. The relative strength index period 14 is at 40 levels and the signal line pointing down to indicate sell signal. Source: https://learn2.trade
• SOLANA REACHES OVERSOLD REGION AS THE ALTCOIN MAKES DEEPER CORRECTION Solana has fallen to the low of \$87 SOL/USD has reached the oversold region Solana (SOL) Current Statistics The current price: \$90.94 Market Capitalization: \$46,528,296,188 Trading Volume: \$4,555,783,625 Major supply zones: \$280, \$300, \$320 Major demand zones: \$160, \$140, \$120 Solana (SOL) Price Analysis January 24, 2022 Solana’s (SOL) price has fallen significantly to the low of \$87 as the altcoin makes deeper correction. The crypto’s price corrected upward but faces resistance at \$104. If the crypto is facing resistance at \$104, it implies that the selling pressure will resume to the downside. Presently, the altcoin is fluctuating between \$80 and \$104 price levels. The crypto will resume trending when the range-bound levels are breached. For instance, if the bears break below the \$80, the market will decline to \$68 low. SOL/USD – Daily Chart Solana (SOL) Technical Indicators Reading Solana is at level 23 of the Relative Strength Index for period 14. The cryptocurrency is seriously in the oversold region. This is an indication that the current downtrend has reached bearish exhaustion. SOL/USD is below the 20% range of the daily stochastic. It indicates that the market has reached the oversold region of the market. Since December 29, the altcoin has been trading in the oversold region of the market. The 21-day SMA and 50-day SMA are sloping downward indicating the downtrend. Conclusion Solana is in a downward move as the altcoin makes deeper correction.. The current price action and Fibonacci tool analysis are closely related. The cryptocurrency has reached the oversold region and there is a possibility of price reversal. Meanwhile, on December 14 downtrend; a retraced candle body tested the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement level. The retracement indicates that Solana will fall to level 1.618 Fibonacci extensions or \$79.34. SOL/USD – Daily Chart     Source: https://learn2.trade