[firewalker]

Originally Posted by firewalker »

I was basically looking at the same yesterday, which I why I was surprised to see the NQ hit resistance but the ES stay behind. Might be worth following both next to eachother, I've often found breakouts to be far more reliable when the corresponding resistance level on a correlated market is breached simultaneously.

Well... the NQ is back below 2000... so that does seem to confirm the 'false break' scenario... (2000 was a fair entry signal too imo)

[firewalker]

Originally Posted by firewalker »

Well... the NQ is back below 2000... so that does seem to confirm the 'false break' scenario... (2000 was a fair entry signal too imo)

and again reaction off 2000...

[firewalker]

Originally Posted by firewalker »

Well... the NQ is back below 2000... so that does seem to confirm the 'false break' scenario... (2000 was a fair entry signal too imo)

Originally Posted by firewalker »

and again reaction off 2000...

Here's the chart of the trades...

There's obviously the context needed, and that context was what I posted this morning in this thread. The NQ finished yesterday at resistance (my horizontal lines), but the ES still had some way to go (up to 1371). The action overnight (congestions) also showed that 2000 was indeed an important level.

Price opened above resistance at the NQ, but in the middle (1368) on the ES. There was no short on the ES (the rejection erie and I talked about), so I took my eye towards to NQ to see what happened there. We broke back below 2000, but instead of going short immediately, I prefer to wait for a move back which in this case I was lucky enough to have, so I could enter with a very tight stop at 2000. First red dot.

The exits are my own personal preferred style, but what I wanted to illustrate was that if breakouts occur on one market, but not on the other, they tend to be less reliable. I know the NQ can have a "mind of it's own", but it's still very much correlated with the other e-minis (see correlation matrix).



Note: I should point out that others might see different things when talking about rejection, breakouts and things like that. But I have my own kind of definitions and they work okay for me. (I also realize that technically the whole 2000-2006 area might be considered as resistance, and that this isn't a 'breakout' of that area).

[erierambler]

Originally Posted by firewalker »

Note: I should point out that others might see different things when talking about rejection, breakouts and things like that. But I have my own kind of definitions and they work okay for me. (I also realize that technically the whole 2000-2006 area might be considered as resistance, and that this isn't a 'breakout' of that area).

It could be pointed out as well that even though you show a correlation between certain futures that one's strategy , exits and entries , are different for each , one reason why others see different things. When I looked at the YM, and NQ and tried to trade the ES, I only confused myself. Now I look only at the ES and only look at the others as a matter of interest, not with respect to trading.
erie

[firewalker]

Originally Posted by erierambler »

It could be pointed out as well that even though you show a correlation between certain futures that one's strategy , exits and entries , are different for each , one reason why others see different things. When I looked at the YM, and NQ and tried to trade the ES, I only confused myself. Now I look only at the ES and only look at the others as a matter of interest, not with respect to trading.
erie

I understand what you mean. That's why I look for clearly defined elements.
I was wondering, do you take premarket trades? After all, 1371 was the place to be...

[erierambler]

Originally Posted by firewalker »

I understand what you mean. That's why I look for clearly defined elements.
I was wondering, do you take premarket trades? After all, 1371 was the place to be...

No premarket. As I'm still evolving, only taking one trade if one presents itself, premarket doesn't interest me. It only appears 1371 was the place to be in hindsight, but I preferred some confirmation of rejection.
erie

[DbPhoenix]

Originally Posted by erierambler »

No premarket. As I'm still evolving, only taking one trade if one presents itself, premarket doesn't interest me. It only appears 1371 was the place to be in hindsight, but I preferred some confirmation of rejection.
erie

I haven't studied the ES as much as the NQ, but it likely has the same sort of tells that the NQ does since the dynamic of these is "organic", i.e., they are the result of trader behavior and not of random plots.

Here, for example, R is tested twice premkt, and one might think there are no other ops for the S/R trader post-open unless R is tested again.

However, note the tight range that occurs just before and during the open. Going short or long a break of this type of range is generally a good entry. Otherwise, there is a test of this just a few minutes later, at 0935, which also provides a good entry.

The advantage of this sort of entry is that it is nearly always good for enough ticks to enable you to get to BE if you do so quickly without waffling around about it. If, for example, you were to short the break of the range, you'd easily get to BE. However, you'd have to keep your wits about you in order to short the subsequent test (this is much easier to do if you know what you're looking for and you know what to do if and when you see it).

[erierambler]

Originally Posted by DbPhoenix »

Here, for example, R is tested twice premkt, and one might think there are no other ops for the S/R trader post-open unless R is tested again.

However, note the tight range that occurs just before and during the open. Going short or long a break of this type of range is generally a good entry. Otherwise, there is a test of this just a few minutes later, at 0935, which also provides a good entry.

The advantage of this sort of entry is that it is nearly always good for enough ticks to enable you to get to BE if you do so quickly without waffling around about it. If, for example, you were to short the break of the range, you'd easily get to BE. However, you'd have to keep your wits about you in order to short the subsequent test (this is much easier to do if you know what you're looking for and you know what to do if and when you see it).

Thanks for the note. Now that you point it out I can see it , but this morning it was a different story I had seen price and planned ahead of time if price came back into the previous day's range I would take the trade at 1366. ( looking for confirmation of rejection )
You have this down as an art.

erie