Quote from SnakeEYE:
Let's look over the situation your chart is showing.
Everyone can see that you choose to superimpose faster candlesticks over slower time frame cantndle sticks. The ratio is arbitrary and is not in a nested fractal orientation. A lot of traders feel the there is noise in markets and as well as anomalies. This kind of arbitrary display settings can be a cause of seeing noise and anomaloies that are actually not present at all. I would say about 99% of all display oriented traders create these false data corrolatiions in their routine practises as a result of poor discision making such as is shown here.
Jack, the question was not about superimposing something here or there.This non dominant 2-nd leg occured during RTH.And look at the volume pace of the first leg,that was outside the RTH, you could hardly discern it.Look at how the price was growing on such a low volume pace.So where was the dominant and non dominant volume?Or is it more of an art to make a difference?So in othere words you suggest to look for the Dom movement outside the RTH, somewhere else, 2-3-4, or whatever days before, or after??
You said:
"THE REASONABLE CHANGE IS:Learn what Dom and Non dom defenition of the volume...."
This is exactly what i`m trying to find out.What i did learn so far is that the Dom volume, (according to the cycle 1 you only trade 2 Dom trades DURING partucular session) may occur in some place that outside the RTH.Since you suggest to trade only RTH, we could wait for the Dom movement for several days.
Attached is an annotation that compliments your annotations; they are compatible with each other.
You have selected a timeframe and annotated the events on that time frame along with three SMA's that deal with the price pane of the chart.
You also use two market periods which are very different from each other in their individual characterisitcs. One period is RTH and the other period is non RTH.
My orientation is to use the PEP and its applications to one set of market criteria only for a given application. For SCT I would apply it to about 80 markets, one of which would be RTH for the ES.
So RTH's abutt one another and the gap between one RTH and the next is removed by making the close + next open. The proof of this is found elsewhere. What is afforded is a carry over from one RTH to the next without any interruption of the interlocking patterns.
So you see two patterns completed the first is a short and the second is a long.
You annotated the volume on the long: a dominant move followed by a miffle move (non dominant) and then the pattern finishes with a final unannotated (re volume) move.
All patterns have two dominant moves separated by a non dominant move.
You use a 15 minute time frame; I happen to use a five minute time frame since more profit segments are delineated.
As you correctly comment the 15 min time frame has payyertns which exceed intraday trading and are more often designated position or swing trading approaches.
The way I see your chart is that it leaves a lot of trades off the table as unobservable. I make them observable for my trading use by beginning with a 5 minute time frame.
You will see many others ise faster time frames and do a style of trading that more closely resembles scapling.
My goal is to use tooling which allows me to extract the optimum amount of capital from the continuing market's offer.
By garnering a set of principles (those posted) which work together in following Science, paradigm theory and logic theory, I attain the best of all worlds by drilling down to the granularity of each market.
On the attached you see fairly esily how a multiple of the ATR is achieved during an ATR period. Yo can also see that the volume annotations lead the lagging price EMA annotations.