Do Trendlines work?

My last post, as i remember, of a few hours of ES on the fiveminute showed 26 segments of price and 27 segments of volume annotationwise. So annotations are mostly enhancements of prior annotations by straight additions of extensions or of annotations of increasing left side width caused by increased volatility. You get alot out of this annotation work. review my colored comments.

The answer to the Q above is: prorata volume is only measured looking at the one of the three charts (15, 5, or2) that you are currently glancing at. Usually it is the five. the longer fractals have volume that is obvious at a glance that enables you to see which of the four Jokari cells that you are in. by constructin Jokari cells using the Boolean expressions of the P, V relation, you are pure and clean for the answers to the three Q's, meaning you know your market contest cold

The crucial factor in your answer appears to be "pace". These are the points that I have identified:

Context:
I am looking for peaking volume at the LHS of the channel.
I am looking for minimum volume at the RHS of the channel.

Pace:
If the pace is fast, sideline if I see reducing volume on 5min fractal. For a slower pace I have the option to trade the countertrend traverse, which I am not doing at present. Focus on pace instead of formations, for the time being. Compare peaking volume in successive guassians on 2min fractal to help identify reversals, along with the usual B2B and R2R.

to respond to you specifically. for fast pace, hold for the poopout on price. Think of exactly what is the prv to drive price to new ground. Know it write it down and see pauses below that volume, hold on hitghes that are not too far below that volume and reason through short dips where theminimum volume in the dip is still close to the prv you wrote down. fast pace (rockets) will be mulitpoint trips. When rocket is in am, this is usually the case. Later not so except when BO in pm startup trading. You will have R and S annotated as the ST and or IT channels. When you hit these limits, it takes even more and stronger volume to get through the longer cycle boundaries. There in that region it is slalom land and the gaussians (two min)will show you a repeating testing of the S or R and that volume will NOT drive beyond. This is where all FTP and FBPs fail. (formations within channels) most edge traders who use formation edges tdo not perceive that they operate in differing ways at different places within trend channels. This is also true when a smaller formation is a segment of a larger formation. the two consecutive charts last done are and example of that. the first chart shows an inverted HS forming and the second chart shows the first ST forming as a BO of a FTP. The SCT cures all of this by the monitoring and analysis combo that is used.

If I went through all the dbphoenix where he did not handle trends and S and R stuff (he would not draw channels but only trendlines and try to trade opposite the left line..ugh), then you would have all the stuff erased that he screwed up at the end of a rocket going into the IT and ST limits we call R or S.

My apologies if this is too simplistic, but I am trying to reach a practical understanding of how to use trend lines in the context of price and volume. Although I am using multiple fractals (15, 5 and 2) I still find that the channel context frequently becomes unclear, leading to whipsaws etc.

whipsaws are done by people who let themslves not observe gaussians. as gaussain observation gains utility, you will be rebuffing and analysis and decisions that can cause whipsaw. I handled you in the colored post with regard to this. I wanted to conduct you to an operating place without adding too many whats and whys. the whipsaw condition is caused by too low a frequency of swep cycles. you must sweep more frequently. Do it like an animal. they do not dwell on what is not changing; they only look for movement (change of staus in the briefest time). your fight of flee heritage can override anything. Period. Absolutely. We are taking that issue to a lesser place. You will get to sports memory where fight or flee lives too. by being sort of tricky, you can embelish fight or flee with things you understand deeply. to get you to do monitoring, analysis, decision making and acting (hold mostly) I am trying to build a wide band (hyway) of traces. This is not a long length of sequences but a wide loop of four parts. The two are different.

Edge traders are absolutel fucked vis a vis sports memory. Why? they have an entry "look for" roientation that is followed by mush thinking. They look for a door, open it and jump into jello. we are bulding a four pie CD and increasing its diameter. each quarter of a rev we go to the radius of the pie that is appropriate, ride it to the next quarter. current quarter to next quarter. Over over and over. ride the bike.
 
Quote from John Merchant:

Team B bench warmer here. I am reluctant to sound like a broken record, but in the context of Jack, it is appropriate.

Do the broken record thing as a way of keeping a set of topics on the table. whether you get more on the table or not is not too important. the topics are best; the redundancy of stating you missed things that you are asking for is less important... so far all that you want has been done at one time or other on the record..you do read all that I write but on the otherhand you are not organized as yet.

Nowhere here have I seen anything but ASSERTIONS that SCT works. I am not saying that it doesn't.

there are loads of ways to do seamless continuous trading. Start with long term trading (Buffett et al). go to any big cap operating decriptions especially commercial ones. Also focus on the wizard books. You will find SCT in many forms there and most people who know markets divorce themselves from edge trading to go to SCT type trading. Capital izing something and representing it that way makes it seem that what's capitalized is more important that the main topic. I am talking about SCT here in this particular forum (thread)

Perhaps it does but is so complex that it is not even amenable to proof.

This is your viewpoint and we all understand it is only based upon where you are and your skill levels. So it is an interesting topic where, perhaps you will make progress or have a breakthrough. were I you I would consider the maths involved first and foremost. From your comments, I perceive that you are not in the ball park at this point. most backtesters use stuff that they buy as software. The producers of that stuff are targeting a mass market opportunity. If you know and remember that polls by pepole like you have consistently proven that 4 out of five people dissagree with me. That is one large group of people who among themselves probably buy a lot of stuff sold in the mass marketing venue.

When i first came here i posted results. they were rejected. i posted, later, a combination of annotated charts, logs and IB trading records. They were rejected too. One person in fact, suggested a particular software he uses, was what i was using to alter the IB prints. so the vast majority of people here have proven to their satisfaction as you have that this is bullshit. Fine. that just makes what i offer as beyond the scope of understanding of the vast majority. I probably just have to recognize that what people want to make a lot of money is definitely not what i do.


But I have tested codable pieces of it, and those pieces tested with negative expectation.

That is the norm. The only places where i have found that good efforts were made were in an academic context. there were conclusions drawn as well. They were different than yours. I did not pay for them, request them and they were done as part of a spectrum of methods under study. I was in a specified place in the spectrum that was considered unsual. I did spend some time in communication with those people (emails and phone calls for a year or so) and additional staff were added at that time. The staff had major contracts with financial industry firms.


And, lest we forget, we saw Nwbprop et al. fail miserably to profit from it in low stress paper trading with Jack's tutelage.

you will find that i was responsive to his initial request. I believe I worked along with many people there on and off the record for a long time. They worked hard. It may be possible that you were on the sidelines watching....It is my opinion that nwbprop did not fail. He is not an sct trader and has not learned to trade through a logical grwoth sequence as yet. Personnally i learned a lot about transference. when i tutor with people and it is a good communication setting I simply put my money where my mouth is and proceed. I admit i can, under the circumstances prevent a lot of unneccessary meandering. 42 days is a nice daily block of time to get to a place where a person can roll. I do not often have to deal with attitude either. usually it is a matter of understanding a mutual goal. you have the opposite goals that i would have with a person or an academic group or the linux crew in Paris, or business schools where i lecture or serve as a national judge for annual B school competitions. You live in a place where it is not likely i could be found.

NWbprop made a request of me, I responded helpfully. you just go around crapping on people from your perch in the dead tree you sit in.

And as to Jack's so-called "call" at the last FOMC, it was incorrect, as compared to my own.

hot shit. keep your cards close...I missed you posted call.

If we lesser mortals can abase ourselves posting our embarrassing little 4-5 tick trades, surely Jack can share a string of his 3X daily range trades.

It's your job to keep up not mine. If you fuck up as you say you has by missing them, then you are responsible. I am a very responsible person. You whine like a teenager.

Hindsight is to foresight as hindskin is to foreskin.

All your hindsight here reeks but keep in your groove; I, rarely, will address your bullshit; this is a small exception.
More...
 
Quote from volente_00:

Do they work ?


Draw one through this chart and then get back to me




http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=^IXIC&t=my
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



lol....one..what for?...why?...


If you draw the trendline you will see that the nas reverted back to the long term trendline after the bubble.
 
Jack. A great response. Thanks! I just love it that you are back. ET was lifeless without you. Next time I am in Tukson I'll call and invite you and the missus out to dinner. I think we would get along great. At least I wouldn't have to talk much! I think you would shit if you could see what I have done with your ideas applied to NQ. But I am not telling here. And I don't regret for a minute the time I wasted analyzing, applying, and testing your stuff. Like I have always said, you are heuristic. Just don't talk to me about "maths", Jack, because I am an applied mathematician and I have got your number.
 
I'd like to develop my sense of where the stops are and how many contracts lurk. There is the fuel and it's just a matter of positioning within or before the stops are activated. Stops, crowd reaction, more stops, more reaction, pause----profit taking.


Trendlines help me with that.


Jack?

Merchant?

Lefty?

Anyone?
 
Making millions? Haha. No, what I got from Jack was to look for a small subset of an index to lead the index, for an index future to get in or out of synch with the underlying cash, for various kinds of price/volume anomalies, and to open your mind up to the simultaneity of events. No doubt Jack would think I was hallucinating to think that was what he taught. Because I don't like losing money forward testing trading theories, I backtested those parts of SCT which were amenable to it, with poor results. But I can assure you that reading his SCT material is a fruitful exercise which stimulates thought in profitable directions. I found that the process of discovering the flaws in what I considered to be dead wrong inspired helpful creative thinking.
 
Duard. I think it was Alan Farley to said to anticipate the price action which will make the most people wrong. If you look at where it is "obvious" to timid traders that they should take a position, then you can usually tell within a couple of ticks where you should wait for a retrace to occur to enter. In most cases price returns to the obvious entry point to shake out the skittish. Of course there are exceptions. But this is commonplace in intraday time frames. Sometimes this fits trendlines, but most often IMO not. Trendlines are obvious in hindsight, but I have never been able to trade them in real time. As I have asserted before, and Maestro backed me up, they don't test well.
 
Yeah, Jack's posts have helped me a lot also.

Jack (I know you are listening) - the focus on sports memory, reversals, wash trades, and annotation I find is similar to the lack of attachment and being in the flow of Zen - see the thread on Zen and Poker or your own life experiences.

Observation, right thinking, emotional awareness, non-attachment, decisions, action, obervation, right thinking, non-attachment, emotional awareness ad infinitum is far more accurate than fear or hope.

Thanks man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top