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

It might be interesting to discuss why at that point the right side of the market was still short, except if you traded ftt to ftt (FFs) and reversed short there again.

 

The market built a R2R (14:05 -14:20 [internal]) which needed to be satisfied.

 

(All times Eastern [close-of bar])

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The market built a R2R (14:05 -14:20 [internal]) which needed to be satisfied.

 

(All times Eastern [close-of bar])

In this case I don't understand what did you mean with your 1150 am edit "EDIT: 14:40 OB was a wash...". Where did you see the previous two reversal points: the "long", and the "short" before that "wash"? I noticed on your chart that r2r, but you seemed to expect it to be followed by a b2b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In this case I don't understand what did you mean with your 1150 am edit "EDIT: 14:40 OB was a wash...". Where did you see the previous two reversal points: the "long", and the "short" before that "wash"? I noticed on your chart that r2r, but you seemed to expect it to be followed by a b2b.

 

3 actions today...

 

Enter Long (bar 2)

Reverse Short (posted the chart snippet)

Reverse Long --> Exit (wash trade on OB)

 

In RT, my decision and action (for my trading fractal) was incorrect in this area (14:10 --> ET) - the market confirmed this with the OB - so I washed the long. The edit was a notification of the error made in my routine. HTH

Edited by ehorn
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 actions today...

 

Enter Long

Reverse Short

Reverse Long --> Exit (wash trade on OB)

 

In RT, my decision and action (for my trading fractal) was incorrect in this area (14:10 --> ET) - the market confirmed this with the OB - so I washed the long. The edit was a notification of the error made in my routine.

Congratulations! Nice trading!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Congratulations! Nice trading!

 

Thanks,

 

Crayola shows the offer (I focus on), what was taken (thick), and what was left (thin). I should have stuck around for that PT3. :)

 

The anti-whipsaw would have been the reversal - not a wash. So PFC (as I see it) has DOM lat, looking for FF completion and PT2 of DOM traverse. Have a nice weekend.

actions.thumb.png.2f80d66c796085a9ddcc0bff8522d5c0.png

Edited by ehorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks,

 

Crayola shows the offer (I focus on), what was taken (thick), and what was left (thin). I should have stuck around for that PT3. :)

Can't argue with such performance :) I just thought that I can incite people to an interesting discussion I, and maybe others, could learn from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who doesn't enjoy a 40 point traverse! :)

 

Hi ehorn,

 

Great move ! WTG !

 

As I study your chart, I observed that from bar 8 (10:10 AM) to 18 ftt, your first tape was from bar 1 to 8, second tape move from bar 8 - 18 on the down move before the final tape up to the top. I had some issues with understanding the 2nd tape move down. On my chart, I had 2 additional tapes on the small move up bar 13 - 15 and then down tape 15 - 17.

 

What would be the right way to annotate this type of situations as I find that it does happen quite alot ?

5aa710096ff4d_ESpart21May10TL.thumb.png.66bd1409abd406547225a6de4edad009.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi ehorn,

 

Great move ! WTG !

 

As I study your chart, I observed that from bar 8 (10:10 AM) to 18 ftt, your first tape was from bar 1 to 8, second tape move from bar 8 - 18 on the down move before the final tape up to the top. I had some issues with understanding the 2nd tape move down. On my chart, I had 2 additional tapes on the small move up bar 13 - 15 and then down tape 15 - 17.

 

What would be the right way to annotate this type of situations as I find that it does happen quite alot ?

It seems that your gaussians don't support your price annotations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What would be the right way to annotate this type of situations as I find that it does happen quite alot ?

 

See attached.

 

Based on your annotation convention, you appear to see the attached chart in terms of three equal containers which create a larger (light green) container. In other words, each of the three equal containers (two blue up and one down red) form in the exact same fashion and exist on equal footing - relative to one another. However (as cnms2 pointed out), your Gaussians fail to match the convention used in your Price Pane. Moreover, even with adjusting your Gaussians correctly, it appears as though you have yet to determine why the three equal weight containers exist in the manner presented.

 

Remember, it is not enough to simply annotate lines onto a chart. One must strive to understand the 'why' behind the action.

 

Begin with asking yourself whether (or not) you have accurately applied the order of events onto this specific chart in a manner applicable to the number of fractals observed.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=21128&stc=1&d=1274557618

 

- Spydertrader

containers.jpg.550d1b07a3ee88ef31aea5e8f27e8142.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See attached.

 

In other words, each of the three equal containers (two blue up and one down red) form in the exact same fashion and exist on equal footing - relative to one another. However (as cnms2 pointed out), your Gaussians fail to match the convention used in your Price Pane. Moreover, even with adjusting your Gaussians correctly, it appears as though you have yet to determine why the three equal weight containers exist in the manner presented.

 

Remember, it is not enough to simply annotate lines onto a chart. One must strive to understand the 'why' behind the action.

 

Begin with asking yourself whether (or not) you have accurately applied the order of events onto this specific chart in a manner applicable to the number of fractals observed.

 

 

- Spydertrader

 

If I understand your comment correctly, for each of the containers to exist on equal footing, then it is part of the 1-2-3 of a larger container. Which would mean that the red move down would be the second move to find pt 3 as you have drawn. The gaussians would be supporting this. So for a full move down, then we need to have a R2R2B2R. So I redrew the gaussians to reflect that (thanks to ehorn's chart).

 

Earlier I drew a tape down FF2, followed by FF3. But it looks like FF3 cannot be on the same footing since it would mean a point 3 within the previous Long TF1. And therefore, it is only a part of the red move down. Hope I am getting it close to getting the "why" correct.

5aa71009886b1_ES052110containers.thumb.jpg.638d0a483d5c73ed3e83527f6443a174.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hope I am getting it close to getting the "why" correct.

 

All markets exist fractally. Therefore, if one wishes to correctly (and thoroughly) annotate a chart in order to reflect this fractal nature, one must know why (according to your convention) the medium weight Red and Blue containers represent one fractal, the light green (thick) container represents a slower fractal, and the black and red (skinny) lines (inside the down medium red container) represents a third (but faster) fractal.

 

**Please note, I have not defined these three containers as 'tapes' or 'traverses' or 'channels' (or even goats).

 

Each of the containers annotated (irrespective of fractal) contains a Point One, Point Two and Point Three. Volume moves Price in a very specific way between these Points. Beginning with each of the Two Bar cases (posted earlier in this thread) expand on what you know as additional bars arrive on scene. At some Point, you'll fail to see that which the market has provided. A short period of time later, you'll ask yourself the question, "How should I have known (or seen) that which I must have missed?"

 

Once you have the ability to form the question, you'll find you already know the answer.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 May 2010 5' ES, Gap Closed. New format.

 

MK

From the height of your volume bars on your chart I'm guessing you're not looking much at the volume information, and you're using that pane mostly to log your price derived annotation. Don't forget that this method is based on price and volume, with volume leading the price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. The volume pane is one side of PV and Price the other. Using one without the other does not make sense. I doubt anyone can trade PV without using volume. I added the plus sign to allow volume to be viewed more easily. For me, during a trading day, the volume pane is larger relative to the price pane. I post the chart as I do to provide what I think is a more complete perspetive, overall. Another reason the volume levels are so low is that I am trying to keep perspective on previous high volume days. Today, volume was not very high compaired to previous days. Most of the time I cannot trade intraday so I trade overnight.

 

MK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote=ehorn;97125]My view of the day... PFC has DOM lat looking for PT2 of accelerated traverse

 

ehorn, thanks for posting. When I study your chart again, it appears that you hvaave 3 gaussians for 3 nested fractals. What is interesting is that not all the lowest fractals gaussians are drawn but only some. So the way I am reading it, the pattern must complete on a particular fractal or what Spyder referred to as equal footing. And if the subsequent gaussians are otherwise, then a sub fractal may be showing up maybe due to lower volumes. In that case, then we need to complete the subfractal PVT to arrive back at the particular fractal move e.g. 1:55pm to 2:40 pm pt 2 to pt 3 move.

 

Am I reading it right this time? If so, then the term fractal jumping is what it is, isn't it ? Which also goes to explain why I get to conflicting B2B followed immediately by R2R moves which is not logical.

Edited by colossians

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I observe that every fractal develops in the same manner (pattern). Some fractals can be hidden or highlighted (depending on pace), but the sequences are always the same. Once all fractals for a given trend have completed, then the trend completes and a new trend begins. HTH

ES-5M-05252010-AM.thumb.png.fa4f8405d0626a07829052a7e99290c3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed that PT multistation trading terminal shows an extra little bar chart for the volume, at the bottom of the chart beneath every candle, which I find convenient, especially for scalpers.

Share this post


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

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Agreed since some of the new traders usually lose money in start and some loses more while chasing their lost money and eventually ends up blaming to their brokers part.
    • The crypto market are also in phase of maturing like the forex and other trading assets so we can do much more accurate analysis than before since early days it was purely a luck if the investments in crypto bears results because most of the coins or tokens never come to fruition. Some early birds were also able to make profits on these tokens or coins. e,g., like turtle coin starts with 1 satoshi and go up to 7 sathoshis, quite good rewards. another token lmgx now hovering at 10 started from 1, 
    • How's about other crypto exchanges? Are all they banned in your country or only Binance?
    • 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/    
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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