Charting --- who uses what?
- Thread starter racehorse
- Start date
Thanks Jack. Me too.
The following abbreviations have been used but not yet defined in this thread. Could you please? I can guess at NN and AI. But asymmetric eludes me in the way that you are using it. The dictionary does not help much.
PNI = ?
NN =
AI =
RW =
APA =
CPM =
FBP =
FTP =
IF1 =
IF2 =
asymmetric = ?
Also, it is vital to this thread that all understand the right and left sides of channels, as well as right-to-left traverse, left-to-right traverse, etc. This could be firmed up. I am attaching a pseudo-chart asking you to define the sides of the channels (1-6), and the direction of the traverses (7-10).
Thanks. This will help as the thread continues.
JohnnyK
I'll give it a try (but don't know the answer). I believe that Jack is refering to the rate of change of volume not being symetric, ie leading upto, in and following a spike. I think this is a new term, i suspect to get us off of looking at 1 min volume (something I must fess up to). I think continualy prorateing the volume will give you an awareness of this principle. I am interested in hearing Jack elaborate.
Thanks again Jack for sharing your knowledge. I have reserved myself to the shadows of late but eveything you post is extrememly helpfull, even if I don't understand it yet
Thanks again Jack for sharing your knowledge. I have reserved myself to the shadows of late but eveything you post is extrememly helpfull, even if I don't understand it yet
I'm having a little trouble figuring out how to calibrate the
offset...
For today 5/13 using 2 minute bars and using the 1 period
MA of the close of INDU/YM.
bar offset
1 10
2 16
3 18
4 19
5 19
6 17
7 19
8 20
Prices were falling during this time.
My assumption is to take 19 as the offset and then adjust it
to something like 17 to get neutral (because prices are falling).
Is this the correct approach:
1) gather offset values until there is a favored value
2) determine price trend over the period
3) determine the favored value
4) adjust 3) based on 2) to get neutral
Thanks
JT
offset...
For today 5/13 using 2 minute bars and using the 1 period
MA of the close of INDU/YM.
bar offset
1 10
2 16
3 18
4 19
5 19
6 17
7 19
8 20
Prices were falling during this time.
My assumption is to take 19 as the offset and then adjust it
to something like 17 to get neutral (because prices are falling).
Is this the correct approach:
1) gather offset values until there is a favored value
2) determine price trend over the period
3) determine the favored value
4) adjust 3) based on 2) to get neutral
Thanks
JT
Thanks Moz, CrescitEundo
If we all work together we might just get this.
I'll be posting another thread edit soon. It will be a massive edit with a consistent format. The format will be along the lines of Lecture>Q&A>TradingNarrative>Q&A>Lecture>Q&A>Method>Q&A...etc. I'll be grouping concepts together. It'll have an index of terms/abbreviations. Possibly even a table of contents...and more. Whatever it takes to "get" this.
I think it will be the best so far, so if you haven't printed the first Word doc yet, it might be worth waiting.
JohnnyK
If we all work together we might just get this.
I'll be posting another thread edit soon. It will be a massive edit with a consistent format. The format will be along the lines of Lecture>Q&A>TradingNarrative>Q&A>Lecture>Q&A>Method>Q&A...etc. I'll be grouping concepts together. It'll have an index of terms/abbreviations. Possibly even a table of contents...and more. Whatever it takes to "get" this.
I think it will be the best so far, so if you haven't printed the first Word doc yet, it might be worth waiting.
JohnnyK
Attached is a handy log for putting down data. If you do it ifr several days, you can get the lay of the land quickly rvry am as the market synchs (offset is established between cash and futures). Use a quote sheet display for ease. For seeing the trending, use the INDU/YM04M chart and see the dynamic of the offset changing.
As you get to monitoring for "continuation" of money making in high contrast to pending change coming up soon, you will "see" very "smooth" changes of status.
We all know that climate surrounding making money is somewhat unpleasant. I do not wish to capitalize on this in a way that seems uncaring; it is very unsettleing indeed. But it is a clear opportunity to extract capital from the futures market almost continually.
We see here that people are rapidly assimilating the essentials on a variety of topics that they raise. Each transition of learning, yeilds more rewards. Having "smart money "leading" you continually is very helpful and very very rewarding.
There is an unpleasant aspect of making money and it largely lies in the foundation and trickles down through all the efforts made by everyone.
It riddles the system in the final analysis. Everyone must address this hazard instead of trying to work around it.
I chose Boolean algebra as the maths of making money from the start. An 024 keypunch was my keyboard a lot of the time. A Selectric at other times. The bi stable multivibrator with 12ax7's on plugaable units captured my reasoning.
However, I feel that Boolean algebra was the right approach for making money.
For every numeric base there is a different and separate algebra.
Market data "fits" the binary system of numeration for me as a direct result of the description of the relationship of price and volume.
If A, then B
and
If the opposite of A, then C.
defines the relationship.
Because of this, I am constrained to making money using the relationship..
Were I to be facing a group of very talented maths people I would vote for using the Naperian base and take it from there. It was debated at IBM thoroughly. Technology prevailed however.
A, B, and C are terms that are vectors based on elapsed time. Trends.
Market systems analysis is best done in the context of making money. Trends are the causal basis for making money.
Neatly, time is used to make money. It elapses.
A is increasing Volume. The opposite of A is decreasing Volume.
Hence I focus on volume as a leading indicator of price. Price action is a consequence of Volume.
B is Price trend will "continue" C is is Price trend will "change".
Notice the key plague that shows up.
A and the opposite of A are "opposites". People handle opposites like duck soup.
It looks like in zero sum games 90% of people don't get this stuff and 10% do. That is 4 out of 5 approximately using small numbers.
B and C are not opposites. Increasing and decreasing are words that can be compared in a flash and they can be monitored and determined in a flash. Nice. Increasing and decreasing are opposites.
The B and C need to be "processed" into something comprehensible. Neither is self-evident in a flash.
The worst news is that they are incomparable as "opposites" are comparable.
When a variable is not connectable to another variable because of no commonness we get to consider them independantly and in isolation. In field theory this often happens.
Each variable B or C, in combination defines the whole. Think Venn, perhaps.
So we need to deal with either "continuation" or "change" as independant consequences of Volume. In a binary way, Volume is increasing or decreasing over time. (the corrolary deals with "unchanging" which is rare and therefore trivial for making money).
The unconnectedness of "continuation" and "change" is an asymmetric condition as stymies almost all traders except experts.
If a person gathers data that can be done in a flash (like playing checkers) and then has to deal with consequences that require reasoning (say like bingo), he may figure out alternatives to just keep playing chackers.
Because we use data besides Volume to make money, we need to fold that stuff into the picture after it is gathered. Price is the other variable.
Two price trend tests are made: continuation or not and change or not.
I go for a shortcut more closely related to making money. I check for "continuation" or "flaws".
"continuation" is a matter of channels. They work according to graphic analysis; parallel lines. Anything else is a "flaw"
With volume trend dictating the price trending or not; I check Price performance.
The resulting analysis is subject to the beliefs based on the P, V relation and then i decide using these beliefs, then I act. Mostly by continuing to accumulate capital by "holding" as a consequence of "continuation" dictated by volume and the consequential price trend formations.
The result of all of this stuff is to only have to deal with times when price trend "changing" is coming up soon in the very near future. Otherwise I am in hold.
most people are caught in a trap of opposites called "continue or "not continue" They act. The over sold and over bought stuff that is screwed up comes from this incorrect reasoning. It is the way most profits are left on the table as trends "continue" after premature exits. the profits'fear and losses'hope pairs from the Nobel prize also emminate from misunderstanding the asymmetric operation of the market.
It riddles the system in the final analysis. Everyone must address this hazard instead of trying to work around it.
I chose Boolean algebra as the maths of making money from the start. An 024 keypunch was my keyboard a lot of the time. A Selectric at other times. The bi stable multivibrator with 12ax7's on plugaable units captured my reasoning.
However, I feel that Boolean algebra was the right approach for making money.
For every numeric base there is a different and separate algebra.
Market data "fits" the binary system of numeration for me as a direct result of the description of the relationship of price and volume.
If A, then B
and
If the opposite of A, then C.
defines the relationship.
Because of this, I am constrained to making money using the relationship..
Were I to be facing a group of very talented maths people I would vote for using the Naperian base and take it from there. It was debated at IBM thoroughly. Technology prevailed however.
A, B, and C are terms that are vectors based on elapsed time. Trends.
Market systems analysis is best done in the context of making money. Trends are the causal basis for making money.
Neatly, time is used to make money. It elapses.
A is increasing Volume. The opposite of A is decreasing Volume.
Hence I focus on volume as a leading indicator of price. Price action is a consequence of Volume.
B is Price trend will "continue" C is is Price trend will "change".
Notice the key plague that shows up.
A and the opposite of A are "opposites". People handle opposites like duck soup.
It looks like in zero sum games 90% of people don't get this stuff and 10% do. That is 4 out of 5 approximately using small numbers.
B and C are not opposites. Increasing and decreasing are words that can be compared in a flash and they can be monitored and determined in a flash. Nice. Increasing and decreasing are opposites.
The B and C need to be "processed" into something comprehensible. Neither is self-evident in a flash.
The worst news is that they are incomparable as "opposites" are comparable.
When a variable is not connectable to another variable because of no commonness we get to consider them independantly and in isolation. In field theory this often happens.
Each variable B or C, in combination defines the whole. Think Venn, perhaps.
So we need to deal with either "continuation" or "change" as independant consequences of Volume. In a binary way, Volume is increasing or decreasing over time. (the corrolary deals with "unchanging" which is rare and therefore trivial for making money).
The unconnectedness of "continuation" and "change" is an asymmetric condition as stymies almost all traders except experts.
If a person gathers data that can be done in a flash (like playing checkers) and then has to deal with consequences that require reasoning (say like bingo), he may figure out alternatives to just keep playing chackers.
Because we use data besides Volume to make money, we need to fold that stuff into the picture after it is gathered. Price is the other variable.
Two price trend tests are made: continuation or not and change or not.
I go for a shortcut more closely related to making money. I check for "continuation" or "flaws".
"continuation" is a matter of channels. They work according to graphic analysis; parallel lines. Anything else is a "flaw"
With volume trend dictating the price trending or not; I check Price performance.
The resulting analysis is subject to the beliefs based on the P, V relation and then i decide using these beliefs, then I act. Mostly by continuing to accumulate capital by "holding" as a consequence of "continuation" dictated by volume and the consequential price trend formations.
The result of all of this stuff is to only have to deal with times when price trend "changing" is coming up soon in the very near future. Otherwise I am in hold.
most people are caught in a trap of opposites called "continue or "not continue" They act. The over sold and over bought stuff that is screwed up comes from this incorrect reasoning. It is the way most profits are left on the table as trends "continue" after premature exits. the profits'fear and losses'hope pairs from the Nobel prize also emminate from misunderstanding the asymmetric operation of the market.
Thanks for your clarification. I don't want to bite off more than I can chew and I also want to try on the KISS basis.
I go with your suggestions - 4 trends a day using "Gimmick". I have the Quote.com service and I have been looking at CBOT:YM04M. The volume verticals are red for the down bars and green for the up bars. The Dow is the market that I'm most interested in.
You appear to suggest on your other writings, trading based on reading the P & V (price and volume) as they progress together.
Could you indicate how basically to read volume on the 5 minute bars for entering and exiting trades?
Thanks.
I go with your suggestions - 4 trends a day using "Gimmick". I have the Quote.com service and I have been looking at CBOT:YM04M. The volume verticals are red for the down bars and green for the up bars. The Dow is the market that I'm most interested in.
You appear to suggest on your other writings, trading based on reading the P & V (price and volume) as they progress together.
Could you indicate how basically to read volume on the 5 minute bars for entering and exiting trades?
Thanks.