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 don't quite understand your view here...

 

Sorry. What I meant was that I never saw a down container form where P1 would have been at 1525 (close of bar). I saw a down tape start there and then an up tape start at 1600. I fanned for the down stitch at 1415 and my up tape continued the next day. On bar 3, the up tape's price was higher than the P1 price. So, I made the mistake of thinking that both tapes belonged in the up container, which I thought had broken out at 1545.

 

The attached is what I was seeing. Please excuse the quality. I don't have a gap removal tool, so I patched it together.

 

That down stitch bar at 1615 was my problem. I didn't think it broke the tape.

5aa70fda77bfa_OnlySaw2Tapes.jpg.981391f029e7576e08357fd1d4906793.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a question on the attachment about fractal levels. Not sure what I saw today.

 

What you have drawn (red and blue) does not accurate reflect reality. You might try deleting all lines and try again in an effort to 'see' what you missed in real time.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thursday, Feb 25, 2010

 

O.K., so you 'lost track' of things, and as a result, the the day's plot became a little muddled for a spell. Now (at the end of the day), the market has clearly provided some certainty on the subject. Having said that, are you certain all trend lines accurately reflect the market? Perhaps, some of your longer term trend lines have created a bias (in your mind's eye) causing you to 'see' things one way - instead of another.

 

Debrief is an excellent time to double check, and validate (in addition to learning something new).

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because "The Blue Thing" does not accurately reflect the information provided by the market.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Because placing "The Blue Thing" on your charts fails to provide sufficent information for most individuals to distinguish between one fractal or another. In other words, "The Blue Thing" says to the trader one thing, when quite another thing entirely is taking place.

 

- Spydertrader

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=19561&stc=1&d=1267052418

 

If you’d be so kind to clarify something for me, please. When does the market provides sufficient information to determine that "The Blue Thing" does not belong on the chart. (A) by the time the lateral formation is created – 11:00 bar eob , (B) by the time the completed b2b2r2b sequence is created of certain thickness – 11:10 bar eob, (C/D) by the time two more sequences in opposite direction are created inside what would have been "The Blue Thing" otherwise – 13:20 bar eob. (see attached)

 

How does one arrive at developing a rule set to deal with the specific context of "The Blue Thing"? If I were to define "The Blue Thing" in binary terms, I arrive at the following: “the completed sequence where both Point Two (of the sequence) and an FTT (of the sequence) are inside the lateral formation created by the bar that begins to move the price from p2 to p3 of the faster fractal container which builds Point One to Point Two of the sequence AND all three components of the sequence are built from faster fractal containers, which are in turn built from even fasterer fractal containers”. So far I have not been able to locate the context that meets the definition that I constructed for "The Blue Thing". Is this the case of the incorect definition (e.g. too rigid)? Is there something similar to "The Blue Thing" that YOU have seen in the past on ES, YM, or anything else, that allows YOU to say: “OK, this "Blue Thing" represents the same context and based on how things worked out last time, placing the lateral annotation here would be a mistake.”? And if so, how did YOU determine that "The Blue Thing" represents the same context from which you generalized (derived) the rule set to be applied to "The Blue Thing".

 

I understand that you created this thread to assist in learning themselves how to fish as opposed to teaching how to fish. To me, the water appears to be so muddy that I can’t even see the fish to begin with. As always, any insight you can share on this subject would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

5aa70fdb5bc4c_bluethingandmediumblueline.thumb.PNG.2c5f3cde098146d2081ef2edd3fc21b0.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When does the market provides sufficient information to determine that "The Blue Thing" does not belong on the chart.

 

Third Bar from the left (I believe that is the 11:10 Bar)

 

How does one arrive at developing a rule set to deal with the specific context of "The Blue Thing"?

 

Start by understanding what you know to represent a Lateral Formation. In this specific thread, we have discussed a process for differentiating one specific type of Lateral Formation. While a trader may not have reasoned through all possible outcomes of The Lateral Formation Drill (and Follow Up), the trader does know subtle differences, within this specific type of Lateral Formation, do exist. The process, for the trader, then becomes learning how these differences translate (based on Context and Order of Events) to chart annotations. As such, moving beyond The Lateral Formation Drill (and Follow Up) to other types of Lateral Formations (prior to reaching a fully differentiated mindset) does not provide clarity. In fact, doing so adds unneeded complexity. Therefore, unless and until one has a complete understanding of one specific type of Lateral Formation, I recommend focusing exclusively on that alone. Place no other examples of Laterals on your chart. You might find that these 'other types' of Lateral Formations bias your thinking, rather than, provide the clarity they were intended. In other words, take things one step at a time.

 

So far I have not been able to locate the context that meets the definition that I constructed for "The Blue Thing". Is this the case of the incorrect definition (e.g. too rigid)?.

 

It appears that you are wondering, "How best to construct (define) a Blue Thing?" This is a fair question. However, I'm merely suggesting you do not need to know how to build (create, construct or define) something, until you answer the question, "Do I need to build (create, construct or define) something?" Right now, unless and until one can go through any example of a Lateral Formation (as defined by The Lateral Formation Drill [and Follow Up]) and know the outcome, then placing additional examples of any other type of Lateral Formation (e.g. those that do not conform to The Lateral Formation Drill [and Follow Up]) on one's chart may create a bias in thinking. That bias, may cause the trader to believe something has developed, when in reality, something has not.

 

Is there something similar to "The Blue Thing" that YOU have seen in the past on ES, YM, or anything else, which allows YOU to say: “OK, this "Blue Thing" represents the same context and based on how things worked out last time, placing the lateral annotation here would be a mistake.”? And if so, how did YOU determine that "The Blue Thing" represents the same context from which you generalized (derived) the rule set to be applied to "The Blue Thing".

 

Most Definitely. What is more, you've seen it as well. In fact, it is that which caused Double Eagle to place a skinny line on his chart - rather than an accelerated Medium Weight Line.

 

I determined the need existed for a change in 'Annotation Technique' because I repeatedly 'jumped fractals' while attempting to maintain fractal integrity. Since, "The Market is Always Right!" the source of error had to be my own. But wait a second, I have no errors! Well, eliminate the impossible (the market is occasionally wrong) and whatever is left (Spydertrader mucked up his annotations), however improbable, must be possible. As a result, I went back to what I knew to be true, and tested it. I did the same, over and over again, with everything I knew to be true - step by step, piece by piece, bar by bar - until i located the source of my error.

 

This is the process of differentiation.

 

I understand that you created this thread to assist in learning themselves how to fish as opposed to teaching how to fish. To me, the water appears to be so muddy that I can’t even see the fish to begin with. As always, any insight you can share on this subject would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

 

I understand reaching , what appears to be, amazingly high levels of frustration while traveling down this road. As a result, I have no problem assisting those who require a nudge in one direction or another. I also understand I can often add to that frustration when I provide answers which appear to provide less than optimal information. Some have suggested my answers appear more like 'riddles' than as an offer of assistance.

 

My best suggestion would be to stop focusing on all unknowns - at once - and instead, focus on the unknowns - one at a time.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What you have drawn (red and blue) does not accurate reflect reality. You might try deleting all lines and try again in an effort to 'see' what you missed in real time.

 

Spyder, thanks very much for your response.

 

Maybe I'm mixing fractal levels? This time through I've managed to eliminate about 4 tapes that were only a few bars in length. Perhaps these were subfractals.

5aa70fdba11f2_ES03-102_25_2010(5Min)-2.jpg.73c86af565e470b8923b91438a638265.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe I'm mixing fractal levels? This time through I've managed to eliminate about 4 tapes that were only a few bars in length. Perhaps these were subfractals.

 

Any line drawn on a chart must have a rational, objective, definable and consistant reason for doing so. Make sure all lines on your chart conform to this definition.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that you are wondering, "How best to construct (define) a Blue Thing?" This is a fair question. However, I'm merely suggesting you do not need to know how to build (create, construct or define) something, until you answer the question, "Do I need to build (create, construct or define) something?"

It appears that I've been attempting to kick in an open door -- and all that's required is a slight shift in paradigm.

 

Thank you for pointing that out.

 

I understand reaching , what appears to be, amazingly high levels of frustration while traveling down this road.

The process is very much similar to a journey through a dark unexplored mansion. One enters the first room and it's completely dark. One stumbles around bumping into the furniture, but eventually one learns where each piece of the furniture is. Finally, after a while one finds the light switch, turns it on, and suddenly it's all illuminated. One can see exactly where you were. Then one moves into the next room and spends another few months in the dark. Unfortunately, each of the breakthroughs couldn't exist without many months stumbling in the dark that proceed them. Thank you for your understanding and continuous feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My view of the day...

 

You have a (Medium Weight) Volume Container which completes at noon (Eastern Time and Bar Close). In order to have had a completion at noon, the market also requires a beginning sometime before noon (and according to your (Medium Weight) Gaussians, this beginning commenced on the previous trading day). Can you annotate this specific container in the Price Pane to match your Annotations in the Volume Pane?

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have a (Medium Weight) Volume Container which completes at noon (Eastern Time and Bar Close). In order to have had a completion at noon, the market also requires a beginning sometime before noon (and according to your (Medium Weight) Gaussians, this beginning commenced on the previous trading day). Can you annotate this specific container in the Price Pane to match your Annotations in the Volume Pane?

 

- Spydertrader

 

I can annotate it, yes.

 

EDIT: I was reading lateral traverse.

pricepane.thumb.jpg.7e0f96706c14b6ddcf7fab53e325d814.jpg

Edited by ehorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can annotate it, yes.

 

O.K. Perhaps, I should have said, "Can you annotate these things correctly in the Price Pane?":helloooo:

 

EDIT: I was reading lateral traverse.

 

Think about Trend Lines for a moment. In an Up Trend, can a Point Three fall below a Point One? In a down Trend, can a Point Three fall above a Point One? Now apply what you know of these answers onto a Lateral Trend.

 

What do you see now?

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
O.K. Perhaps, I should have said, "Can you annotate these things correctly in the Price Pane?"- Spydertrader

 

Now that is applying some context! LOL!

 

Well, I snuck by with it this morning - but I recall a discussion we had some time back about how the market can present situations where one is lulled into thinking they are correct until they are presented with a similar situation where they are NOT. The AM tricked me today by giving me just enough rope to hang my PFC premise on. Admittedly, there was little breathing room in there for a DOM short. :)

 

Think about Trend Lines for a moment. In an Up Trend, can a Point Three fall below a Point One? In a down Trend, can a Point Three fall above a Point One? Now apply what you know of these answers onto a Lateral Trend.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Surely. That darn PT3 was so close to my gap adjusted TL's I was second guessing my carry over values (and without the benefit of auto gap removal - I went with it). I will wipe off the lines and give it another go with a clear head in a morning debrief to see what I can see.

 

Thanks and have a great eve!

 

EDIT: ok, I will take door # 2... Down traverse completion @ 15:05 yesterday for PT1; PT2 @ 11:00 Today; PT3 @ 12:00, then onto accel. If I accept this then it was not this A.M where the initial misstep occurred, but overlooking yesterday afternoons completion which subsequently gave me an inaccurate PFC and placed me on the wrong footing.

 

All times Eastern and [close-of] 5M bar.

Edited by ehorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friday, Feb 26, 2010

 

What I saw today:

 

There was a BO of the CO up-traverse at 10:05. Pace was in line with my expectations and I saw an R2R that appeared to be on the same fractal. When the 10:35 bar “invalidated” the P1 (10:00) of my forming down-traverse, I determined that I had actually seen an FBO. Perhaps I need to be wary of this following acceleration, i.e., maybe FBO's are more common after accelerating.

 

Throughout the day, I fanned the up-traverse due to decreasing volume at the RTL.

I saw another BO of the CO up-traverse at 16:00. I’ll be waiting for P3 of the forming down-traverse on Monday morning, although because of the increase in volume at the end of the day, I think P3 may have already formed on today’s 16:15 bar. Still, the close was high on the bar, so this is TBD.

 

The volatility of the open seems to have a habit of “ruining” a nice formation like this. I’m curious to see what Monday will bring.

 

(All times close-of-bar.)

 

Thanks for any feedback!

5aa70fdcf3ea2_ES03-102_26_2010(5Min).jpg.8818fd4ffb66eea4522008c8da72a972.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Friday, Feb 26, 2010

 

 

 

Thanks for any feedback!

 

You are right about the r2r being a problem, but you don't see that you have a more consistent problem in the rest of the chart.

As you know, the sequences are:

r2r2b2r, and

b2b2r2b.

 

On the same fractal, they alternate. You have annotated an entire ES day with only one such correct sequence, and a partial sequence to end the day. What's going on in between?

 

ehorn's chart of the same day contains nothing but those sequences, on 3-4 levels.

I suggest you study his chart closely to see what he is seeing that you are not.

 

What are the orange and blue dots in the volume pane? They seem to obscure the actual levels....

 

- become

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Friday, Feb 26, 2010

 

 

Thank you for your post. After reading your comment on the volume panel of your chart, I realized that I have not seen this r2r b2b combination animal on my charts in a while (while they seem to pop up all over the place in the past). What is different now?

 

As you see from my Thursday's chart I too was looking for a down sequence to follow next. Volume from start of Friday to 10:10est went from decreasing red volume to increasing red volume, appearing to be a r2r. Then as you mentioned by 10:35est market marked a higher high. Thus the market was telling me that I was not in a down sequence, thus what I thought I saw earlier was not a r2r. So what can it be? To me it meant that what I had annotated as the end of the up sequence on Thursday was not correct. The up sequence is continuing. So I scroll back and look to see how this new information might change what I had annotated earlier. And look to see how this new information fits into the picture. What must come next now with this new information? Those are the steps I take. I hope this is helpful to you :)

 

Happy MADA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys. First I'd like to say thanks for the wealth of information and consistency you guys have put into this thread. I'm just starting a lengthy read from front to back; I'm only on page 12 at the moment.

 

The reason I'm reading this thread is because I've been watching ES price action/volume intraday (every day) for 1 year and noticed some of my own interpretations of the price/vol relationship appear in the rules set out by Spydertrader in the beginning of the thread.

 

I would like to ask if there is a point in this thread where the guys discuss position sizing/risk:reward ratios, or is that all left to each individual's decision making? Are there any sizing/R:R principles you guys use if a sequence is proven wrong and you 'reverse' long/short? Or is it constant size/R:R every trade?

 

From my own interpretations, some opportunities are more ripe than others, and I go larger size/various R:R. I would appreciate any thoughts you guys have on this from your own trading in the price/vol relationship.

 

Thanks :cool:

Share this post


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

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Date : 21st January 2022. Market Update – January 21 – Stocks Sink – Netflix & Peloton Crash. Stock markets sank again (Nasdaq -1.3%) Tech companies led the slide, (Peloton -24%, Netflix -18% post results. USD firmed as Yields & Oil dipped, Gold held onto to gains. Markets are nervous and risk aversion has picked up as investors eye shaky earnings, and waning confidence, with mounting tensions over Ukraine adding to geopolitical tensions. US Weekly claims hit a 3-mth high, EZ Inflation was an ATH and North Korea said it may resume testing its nuclear arsenal. Asian markets and AUD & NZD lower (AUDJPY -0.62%) ASX 200 (-1.2%), Nikkei 225 (-1.8%).   USD (USDIndex 95.65) ticks higher slips as Yields decline . US Yields 10-yr moved closed at 1.83% & trades at 1.785%. Equities – USA500 -50 (-1.1%) 4482 – USA500 FUTS lower again at 4467. USOil – Fell below $82.00 afrom highs at 87.95 on Wednesday, Inventories increased by 0.5m vs 2.3m drawdown. Gold – held on to gains topped at $1848 and holds $1838 now, holding the key 1830 support. Bitcoin under $40,000 back to test $39,000, FX markets – EURUSD back to test 1.1300 – 1.1322, USDJPY now 113.80 & Cable back to 1.3570, the week’s low. Overnight – UK Retail Sales plunged -3.7%, Consumer confidence slipped 4 whole points to -19 and Japanese core inflation was inline at 0.5%. European Open – The 10 US Treasury yield is up from overnight lows, Bunds are also finding buyers in opening trade, and the 10-year continues to shy away from turning positive, as ECB officials continue to push back against speculation of an early rate hike at the end of the year and market sentiment generally turns cautious. DAX and FTSE 100 future are posting losses of -1.4% and -1.1% respectively. Today – EZ Consumer Confidence, BoE’s Mann; ECB’s Lagarde, BoJ’s Kuroda Biggest FX Mover @ (07:30 GMT) EURNZD (+0.66%) Rallied from 1.6675 yesterday to breach 1.6800 now. MAs aligned higher, MACD signal line & histogram higher. RSI 73 OB but still rising, H1 ATR 0.0026 Daily ATR 0.0100. Always trade with strict risk management. Your capital is the single most important aspect of your trading business. Please note that times displayed based on local time zone and are from time of writing this report. Click HERE to access the full HotForex Economic calendar. Want to learn to trade and analyse the markets? Join our webinars and get analysis and trading ideas combined with better understanding on how markets work. Click HERE to register for FREE! Click HERE to READ more Market news. Stuart Cowell Head Market Analyst HotForex Disclaimer: This material is provided as a general marketing communication for information purposes only and does not constitute an independent investment research. Nothing in this communication contains, or should be considered as containing, an investment advice or an investment recommendation or a solicitation for the purpose of buying or selling of any financial instrument. All information provided is gathered from reputable sources and any information containing an indication of past performance is not a guarantee or reliable indicator of future performance. Users acknowledge that any investment in FX and CFDs products is characterized by a certain degree of uncertainty and that any investment of this nature involves a high level of risk for which the users are solely responsible and liable. We assume no liability for any loss arising from any investment made based on the information provided in this communication. This communication must not be reproduced or further distributed without our prior written permission.
    • Best way to make money is forex trading however it still requires a lot of hard work needed to build necessary skills which are required to earn money from forex.
    • I bet he was referring to acquire all the basic necessary skills needed to start earning money from the forex trading.
    • Yes agreed we can do forex trading as part time in the start and when we learn trading we can switch to full time trading.
    • You will only earn from forex trading if you know how to trade and when to trade otherwise you will only enter this market to lose money.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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