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

"How can you (or anybody following along with this discussion) know with 100% certainty that the down container, which began on 10-13-2010 (at 14:15 Eastern Time), must have ended at some point in time today (10-15-2010)?"

 

When we see BO of container's RTL with increasing volume, we know that the container has ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
with BO of the RTL ?

 

We can only know that with 100% certainty when price exceeds the high of 14:15 on 10-13-2010.

 

When we see BO of container's RTL with increasing volume, we know that the container has ended.

 

 

can you post a chart with lines and arrows to illustrate? ...so that we can be on the same page?

 

if this knowledge is important enough to learn,

and you are serious enough to want to be certain about getting it absolutely right,

I am sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to whip up a few lines and arrows on a chart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We can only know that with 100% certainty when price exceeds the high of 14:15 on 10-13-2010.

 

Bingo!!

 

Now certainly, we can know before this point in time, but only after developing the knowledge, skills and experience to do so.

 

Once the market indicates it has provided a trader with a known entity you can then, and only then, begin the learning process - step by step - without jumping ahead.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The market begins a new cycle (for all fractals) at 14:15 (Eastern Time) yesterday (10-13-2010). Start the annotation process from that point in time.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

 

"There is only one problem in life: How do you go about the process of solving problems."

 

Thank you for the starting point!

 

I think my foremost problem when I go about applying a concept or a "reason" to market annotations is that I always feel there are too many variables swirling around. It feels like trying to solve X=Y+Z where only one specific and unknown value is the correct answer for X. So I end up for example trying to apply a reason why a Tape formed in a specific way, but that one has a lateral (another variable to me most of the time). Well ok, I will determine how that lateral effects the Tape, but of course I don't know for certain why the Tape is formed that way. Then the downward spiral begins :rofl:

 

It is amazing how damn hard it is for me to find two apples to compare. And being certain both things are apples is beyond reach. So, I hope with the starting point you graciously provided to lock a few knowns in place.

 

I am very happy you chose this particular area to give a known starting point. The first move down will almost always lead to me jumping fractals. About the only way for me to avoid fractal jumping in this case is to know my up Channel is correct and complete, so my down Traverse can't be complete until crossing (closing outside?) the Channel RTL. I am sure more precision is possible and I want to attain that precision.

 

On this chart I have deleted my Tape gaussians because two of them don't quite seem to work the way I drew them. I also deleted many of the finer lines. I know we should start with the 10 cases and work upwards, but in this case the Tapes are giving me trouble so I hope to work from the top down.

 

What I think I know on this chart:

1. The Green carryover up Channel is correct.(?)

 

2. The down Traverse can not be complete until closing outside the Channel RTL.(?)

 

What I am hoping to beg answers to: :)

1. Can it be known the Traverse is not complete without the up Channel RTL (more precision)?

 

2. Did I still manage to jump fractals with the gaussians shown?

 

3. For a Pt 2, do you normally use the geometric placement or the actual point where you end the x2x?

 

Sorry for the length.

 

TIA

es101314.thumb.png.123dea8eb0e3b3cbd54f5e584b91ba15.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want to thank everyone for the discussion of the "three levels" chart snipit. I have spent an inordinate amount of time studying this without success. I hope that with Patraders answers I can find some resolution.

 

Gucci asked: Why is the trough for B2B for the medium lines (thing, goat, faster fractal traverse, whatever) located at 10:45 and not at 10:35 ?

 

But, my question has always been: Why is the medium B2B not at 10:25? Which is the point where the gaussians "should" (haha) nest. See attached.

 

Ok. Here is what I see in the chart. The question on the table is why the trough of the medium lines is not at 10:25.

 

So see it this way. Let us assume you put your trough for medium lines initially at 10:25. So far so good.

 

What must come next?

 

Increasing black volume. At 10:30 you get it. So far so good again. On the price pane you connect the start of the sequence with the low of the price bar at 10:25 in order to get your container for the medium volume B2B sequence.

 

Now what must come next? Decreasing volume with price moving through RTL of the price container the market created with its B2B volume sequence. What did come? Decreasing volume which failed to move the price through the RTL of the medium container. So we can not be at the point 2 of the medium sequence yet. What is the logical consequence ?

 

Try to think now about what the volume trough at 10:55 indicated. And what happened in the price pane and volume pane at 11:05 and 11:10.

 

HTH.

 

Do not forget: three movements for the price and four movements for the volume This is where overlapping of trends somewhere should happen.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a nogap chart from P1 at 14:15 on the 13th Oct. I have accelerated medium rtl's after a VE and decelerated the rtl's (fanned) after bo with decreasing volume. I expected a long medium container from 15:05 (green triangle) but this was proven wrong at 10:20 on the 15th when price descended below the low of 15:05, unless my long thin container is actually medium. I read from earlier in the thread that volume determines the appropriate gaussian thickness but I can't see how. If anyone has figured out how then please help.........

5aa7103c08b3b_ES12-10(5Min)from1415on10_13_2010.thumb.jpg.7a76c34fad7cf6342fe4551ee9f338c5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok. Here is what I see in the chart. The question on the table is why the trough of the medium lines is not at 10:25.

Thank you for your thoughts but I fail to see how your post answers the question. Looking at the black peaks they decrease to a minimum at 10:20 followed by a sequence of increasing peaks. So it would seem logical to put the trough at 10:25. And I am still mystified how we can have a medium gaussian sequence all contained inside the rtl that defines the medium b2b. Perhaps the chart clip is from a thread that does not adhere to the conventions described in THIS thread......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for your thoughts but I fail to see how your post answers the question. Looking at the black peaks they decrease to a minimum at 10:20 followed by a sequence of increasing peaks. So it would seem logical to put the trough at 10:25. And I am still mystified how we can have a medium gaussian sequence all contained inside the rtl that defines the medium b2b. Perhaps the chart clip is from a thread that does not adhere to the conventions described in THIS thread......

 

This is not only about the volume, but also about the price. Hence price-volume relationship. The troughs of the volume correspond to the points on the price pane. If you have 2R on the volume pane, this 2R should do something to the price and trend lines in order to be part of the sequence on your fractal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is not only about the volume, but also about the price. Hence price-volume relationship. The troughs of the volume correspond to the points on the price pane. If you have 2R on the volume pane, this 2R should do something to the price and trend lines in order to be part of the sequence on your fractal.

That is obvious. What is still not clear is why the B2B trough is at 10:45.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can it be known the Traverse is not complete without the up Channel RTL (more precision)?

 

Yes.

 

Did I still manage to jump fractals with the gaussians shown?

 

Yes.

 

For a Pt 2, do you normally use the geometric placement or the actual point where you end the x2x?

 

Actual Point.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is obvious. What is still not clear is why the B2B trough is at 10:45.

 

 

Well, if that was obvious for you then why did you suggest that my first response didn't provide the answer to the question on the table?

 

I guess the next answer is obvious as well.

Edited by gucci

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want to thank everyone for the discussion of the "three levels" chart snipit. I have spent an inordinate amount of time studying this without success. I hope that with Patraders answers I can find some resolution.

 

Gucci asked: Why is the trough for B2B for the medium lines (thing, goat, faster fractal traverse, whatever) located at 10:45 and not at 10:35 ?

 

But, my question has always been: Why is the medium B2B not at 10:25? Which is the point where the gaussians "should" (haha) nest. See attached.

A quick interpretation.

example-.jpg.8e57c3f7ff44594042d4e1bcc9c996ce.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok. Here is what I see in the chart. The question on the table is why the trough of the medium lines is not at 10:25.

 

So see it this way. Let us assume you put your trough for medium lines initially at 10:25. So far so good.

 

What must come next?

 

Increasing black volume. At 10:30 you get it. So far so good again. On the price pane you connect the start of the sequence with the low of the price bar at 10:25 in order to get your container for the medium volume B2B sequence.

 

Now what must come next? Decreasing volume with price moving through RTL of the price container the market created with its B2B volume sequence.

What did come? Decreasing volume which failed to move the price through the RTL of the medium container.

So we can not be at the point 2 of the medium sequence yet.

What is the logical consequence ?

 

Try to think now about what the volume trough at 10:55 indicated. And what happened in the price pane and volume pane at 11:05 and 11:10.

 

HTH.

 

Do not forget: three movements for the price and four movements for the volume This is where overlapping of trends somewhere should happen.:)

 

Highlighted in bold, you say we cannot be at the end of the medium B2B, it's P2, until price BO of the B2B container (Olive) with increasing volume.

 

As price did not BO of it's B2B container (Olive), why is there a medium 2R gaussian ?

 

Why isn't that medium 2R a thin 2r gausian

ie: b2b2r2b 2r(at10.45)2b 2r(at11.10)2b ?

 

Or the thick B2B is not instead a medium B2B ?

 

Kind Regards

5aa7103c1c981_gucci_spyderteraderexample1.jpg.3f6d5acc8c1148914c40a2bde32897dc.jpg

Edited by zt379

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A quick interpretation.

 

It looks like you are simply using 1 additional faster fractal level instead of 3.

 

Thick (trend)

Medium (traverse)

Thin (tape)

Dotted (bbt) bbt = "building block of tape"

 

An alternative way think of it:

 

Thin goes the minimum volume sequence plus a 2R 2B .. so B2B 2R 2B 2R 2B - this creates an accelerated RTL.

 

Medium joins on the last thin 2R. Medium's 2R breaks accelerated RTL.

 

Thick 2B is WMCN.. capping it with an FTT

 

Edit: Is this correct?

4levels.jpg.61b40d64e72af511dd57c8c62e310f12.jpg

Edited by saturo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What must come next?

 

Increasing black volume. At 10:30 you get it. So far so good again. On the price pane you connect the start of the sequence with the low of the price bar at 10:25 in order to get your container for the medium volume B2B sequence.

 

 

Yes, this is exactly what I see.

 

Now what must come next? Decreasing volume with price moving through RTL of the price container the market created with its B2B volume sequence. What did come? Decreasing volume which failed to move the price through the RTL of the medium container. So we can not be at the point 2 of the medium sequence yet. What is the logical consequence ?

 

Agreed, this can not be Pt 2 of the medium sequence.

 

Two things make logical sense to me here:

 

1. The medium B2B can not yet be complete. I arrive at this by WWT (what wasn't that), as it was not the 2R the B2B must still be forming.

Or

2. The medium B2B was started in the wrong location.

 

I know #2 is obviously the correct conclusion, I am just stuck on the why.

 

Try to think now about what the volume trough at 10:55 indicated. And what happened in the price pane and volume pane at 11:05 and 11:10.

 

10:55 appears the same to me as 10:35.

 

11:05 and 11:10 form a down container which fail to move through the RTL just as happened at 10:45. However, both bars of the 11:05 container are decreasing volume unlike the previous.

 

HTH.

 

Do not forget: three movements for the price and four movements for the volume This is where overlapping of trends somewhere should happen.:)

 

I really feel like I am being dense and missing something obvious, not that it would be the first time. :)

 

Thank you very much for the comments!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More precision?

Yes.

 

Jumped fractals?

Yes.

 

 

Geometric or actual?

Actual Point.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Thanks very much for the response. 1 and 3 are what I wanted to hear :)

 

I am also happy to learn that I still jumped fractals. Mainly because, as I said, this is the kind of market action that always causes me trouble so maybe I can learn something. Also because what follows the chart I posted made my head hurt attempting to reconcile it with the annotations I had in place.

 

My first inclination is that I completed things too quickly. This is usually how I fail, and what follows my annotated Traverse appears to me to be an up Tape then down Tape. So, by WWT my original Traverse must be a Tape.

 

Let me chew on this for a bit and I will get a new chart posted.

 

Thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tapes make traverses make channels, and their gaussian relationship

 

Thanks for the chart.

 

The caption on your chart says: "Each Tape is made of three "subtapes", each constructed from the 10 cases". While that seems to be the case on your chart, it is not always the case. Reference recent chart sections from Spyder attached.

 

I suppose it comes dwon to contextual differences?

tapes.thumb.JPG.9506edcdde7eff2b16f90b6ed98f8d23.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jumped Fractals?

Yes.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Spyder,

 

I had planned for this chart to be a reworked version of my previous chart. But seeing as how many possibilities there are in that area for me to make mistakes it may be best to move forward a bit before going back. Also, I do not want to give the impression that I am just slinging crap at this until something sticks. :)

 

This chart is the period directly following the last, 10/14 pm-10/15am. This area had me questioning my annotations on the previous chart due to what is marked as an up Tape. I feel this has to be a Tape and because of what follows, a down Traverse could not have preceded this area. Normally, I would just correct my fractals and move on but that does not aid in learning. Like you said, things need to be precise. This time I will figure out why I was wrong.

 

For the up Tape there is a nice B2B which gets me outside the previous down Tape. A lateral formation creates the 2R. As price exits the lateral the market provides 2B. This is followed by a down Tape making a lower low telling me that my Traverse could not have been complete before now. Does this sound sensible and have I arrived at the correct fractals for this area?

 

Also, I have a more mechanical type question if you don't mind. For an IBGS, I have always tried to take the name literally. Anytime I encounter one it tells me that a gaussian line has changed direction on some fractal. Am I being too rigid in this view?

 

Thanks again for your time!

es101415.thumb.png.ce9c8e56a2242cc6de9c81d75782ab2d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tapes make traverses make channels, and their gaussian relationship

As a general principle this sounds fine but in reality, the market simply does not behave in a uniform 3*3 relationship as in your theoretical illustration.

Share this post


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

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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/    
    • 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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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