Fractal Theory I

[plantrader]

Mon & Tue, June 15th & 16th: nice example of a run-on tape (or so i think).

Heroic, would you mind posting an annotated chart for those 2 days? Or anyone who has a firm enough grasp of Heroic's method usage. I suspect that'll reduce my questions. I have enough of a basis that, at that point I can likely ask better questions. Rather than me posting a mistake-riddled chart of my own & then unknowingly fail to realize I don't get all the answers/info about what I've done wrong. It'd be way more effective for me to analyze a correct chart, instead, if you don't mind? I'd appreciate it as a learning tool. I'm looking to modify the holes in my game, and I suspect it's a handful of aspects that wouldn't take forever for me to sort once I have a few clear pointers.

 

[llIHeroic]

Were you given any charts you know to be correctly annotated during your mentoring? It might be helpful to see what the finished product of the skill-sets you were learning is to see whether it is the same conventions that I use.

We can eventually get to comparing and viewing whole multi-day larger fractals, but I think it's best to fully understand the smallest visible segments first. You say you understand nesting but from the way you talk this doesn't appear to be the case.

You thought the teal container we were discussing previously was the smallest visible fractal, when I've outlined that the FC is our smallest visible fractal and there are several of those within said container. Also, you've asked for annotations of a run-on Tape for the past two days when we've actually completed two whole Tape sequences since 9.50 EST on 6/15 and we're well underway on the second dominant leg of a Traverse.

 

[plantrader]

Were you given any charts you know to be correctly annotated during your mentoring? It might be helpful to see what the finished product of the skill-sets you were learning is to see whether it is the same conventions that I use.

We can eventually get to comparing and viewing whole multi-day larger fractals, but I think it's best to fully understand the smallest visible segments first. You say you understand nesting but from the way you talk this doesn't appear to be the case.

You thought the teal container we were discussing previously was the smallest visible fractal, when I've outlined that the FC is our smallest visible fractal and there are several of those within said container. Also, you've asked for annotations of a run-on Tape for the past two days when we've actually completed two whole Tape sequences since 9.50 EST on 6/15 and we're well underway on the second dominant leg of a Traverse.

As far as what we have the past 2 days, that's why I asked for a chart. I'd like to see what you've defined, because it may resonate with me & help me decipher my shortcomings. I don't know exactly what you call a Tape vs what I call a Tape. Mine has to either be 1 container that has Pace Acceleration (in volume) or else it has to be composed of a minimum of 3 BBTs each of which has to have a Pt123FTT. But terminology means less to me than being able to see the "things" you define.

Please post a chart, it would help greatly in a basis for discussion. Or are you saying you'd rather I post a chart & we work backwards from something that's incorrect? I'd prefer to start with something correct & I can better identify how it differs from my stuff (my incorrect stuff, if so). I do understand nesting, but if I don't fully get how to terminate/identify ALL the contents, then my nest of fractals will be off while yours will be on.

Edit: I also do understand your EW BBTs and why (BBT1 as the roadmap of min requirements for BBT2 & BBT3), and I understand why we often end up having to continue BBT1 instead of it being in its simplest form (basically, due to a failed thing in the opposite direction = continue the initial thing & fan it). And also understand how to identify a vol cycle within a BBT vs not having one (and therefore not needing one in BBT2/3). What I feel I'm lacking is when/why the subfractals (when something even faster becomes possible to identify) matter vs when they don't & how everything ends up resolved during run-on "things". As in, when there are multiple potentially valid endings but they don't pan out. There may be something in the faster stuff that is giving you clues & that I'm missing. I would also be very interested in your comments about relative troughs & peaks as part of the clues. When/why/how, on that note. An annotated chart with some comments pointing out various pivotal things such as that would go a long way as I do have a basis already (even if you don't think I do b/c I realize I haven't shown it too well in a chart yet). My point on the teal container was that the down thing within it didn't FTT, therefore we fan the teal & that means teal at that point is the main (only) thing that matters as long as we get a FTT of it. But relative to the VEs involved, I think I was missing something in the faster stuff interpretation. I SEE it, I just wasn't exactly sure in what way it was important/used versus just looking for teal FTT.

 

[xioxxio]

llIHeroic put yourself out there and post annotated charts. You did start this thread

 

[llIHeroic]

I've already "put myself out there" and posted plenty of annotations in my thread already. I'm donating some time and effort to explaining the principles behind my trading at no personal benefit to myself; I am not obligated to do anything nor are you entitled to anything.

Here's my chart for the past two days; I really hope it helps as much as you think it will. However, unless you understand why to draw the lines and what fractals they represent, seeing the finished product over and over again isn't going to advance your skill-set. I think this is painfully obvious seeing as there are dozens of properly annotated charts publicly available in past threads on this forum.

I've suggested what I believe is an effective course of action to advance one's skills in this method, and offered to provide support for individuals interested in doing so. Instead, I see people coming in making demands without following my instructions. plantrader, I asked you one question whether you received any properly annotated charts during your mentoring so I could better assess your skills and you didn't even bother to answer me.

I don't think the current direction or tone of my thread is productive or worthwhile in devoting my time and energy to. I'll be around if anyone is interested in beginning to annotate and discuss FCs as initially directed but I'm not playing these games anymore.

 

[plantrader]

I've already "put myself out there" and posted plenty of annotations in my thread already. I'm donating some time and effort to explaining the principles behind my trading at no personal benefit to myself; I am not obligated to do anything nor are you entitled to anything.

Here's my chart for the past two days; I really hope it helps as much as you think it will. However, unless you understand why to draw the lines and what fractals they represent, seeing the finished product over and over again isn't going to advance your skill-set. I think this is painfully obvious seeing as there are dozens of properly annotated charts publicly available in past threads on this forum.

I've suggested what I believe is an effective course of action to advance one's skills in this method, and offered to provide support for individuals interested in doing so. Instead, I see people coming in making demands without following my instructions. plantrader, I asked you one question whether you received any properly annotated charts during your mentoring so I could better assess your skills and you didn't even bother to answer me.

I don't think the current direction or tone of my thread is productive or worthwhile in devoting my time and energy to. I'll be around if anyone is interested in beginning to annotate and discuss FCs as initially directed but I'm not playing these games anymore.

Games? What has offended you? I don't mind doing as you suggested, and I doubt anyone else does either. As to whether "properly annotated" charts were provided during my mentoring... I DON'T KNOW. That's why I'm here. The understanding I've ended up with is decent in various areas, but I suspect it might be lacking in a couple/few other areas of know-how. That's why I'm here. My mentoring was what it was, and that's Ok. I am here to glean a better understanding if that's what I need or can get. Please don't be offended, as this thread is for discussion I assume. And thanks for the chart, I appreciate that! I'll marinate on it a while.

How can I satisfy you that I'm not totally clueless on the FC construction? What would you like to see? A portion of a chart with comments, or?

 

[midtown]

Wow! Please, folks! Don't you understand the tremendous generosity of Heroic to be providing this information? Volunteers are not in it for anything but the opportunity to give something of value. I agree that another chart is welcome. I must say, though, that there was a wealth of information in the charts posted for 6-2, 6-3 and very few questions posed regarding the thought process that went into the decisions made. I am tremendously appreciative, Heroic, and I hope that you will continue to tolerate our less than exemplary attempts to implement your suggestions.

 

[llIHeroic]

Games? What has offended you?

I'm not upset; although the sense of entitlement I perceived in xioxxio's post where he hasn't contributed anything valuable to the thread yet he evidently feels comfortable dictating me to post more content and challenging my transparency when I didn't respond instantly to your demand for a chart was unpleasant.

To be fair, there's always a chance I've projected an impression he didn't intend though. The game I am referring to is when people come in and make frequent demands and/or ask a bunch of questions instead of listening and get upset when the other party doesn't play along or eventually they realize they aren't getting the results they desire.

I know you mean well, but you're not hearing what I'm saying. Let me try to be clearer.

1. Since you're coming in with past mentoring experience, post a fully annotated chart you received from your classes so I can understand better what you have already learned and practiced if you want to continue this dialogue.

If during the 12 months of your study, you were never given a completely annotated chart to study, which I would find a bit odd, inform me of that instead.

2. Begin to annotate FC's and study their contents. Label them as Simple / Complex. If you want to discuss larger fractals, post a chart with three FC's clearly annotated and illustrate your attempt to merge them into larger fractal trend and we will discuss your efforts. Fully annotate the segments you want to discuss to the best of your ability.

 

[plantrader]

I'm not upset; although the sense of entitlement I perceived in xioxxio's post where he hasn't contributed anything valuable to the thread yet he evidently feels comfortable dictating me to post more content and challenging my transparency when I didn't respond instantly to your demand for a chart was unpleasant.

To be fair, there's always a chance I've projected an impression he didn't intend though. The game I am referring to is when people come in and make frequent demands and/or ask a bunch of questions instead of listening and get upset when the other party doesn't play along or eventually they realize they aren't getting the results they desire.

I know you mean well, but you're not hearing what I'm saying. Let me try to be clearer.

1. Since you're coming in with past mentoring experience, post a fully annotated chart you received from your classes so I can understand better what you have already learned and practiced if you want to continue this dialogue.

If during the 12 months of your study, you were never given a completely annotated chart to study, which I would find a bit odd, inform me of that instead.

2. Begin to annotate FC's and study their contents. Label them as Simple / Complex. If you want to discuss larger fractals, post a chart with three FC's clearly annotated and illustrate your attempt to merge them into larger fractal trend and we will discuss your efforts. Fully annotate the segments you want to discuss to the best of your ability.

I'd prefer not to refer to the charts from my mentoring, to be frank. As I said, I've definitely learned some useful things, but I'd rather show MY chart if that's what you prefer & then you can see what I either learned incorrectly or else may have understood incorrectly. I am NOT hung up on adhering to exactly what I've learned so far, which is why I would rather not post someone else's work. I don't mind showing mine, though. So far, in the charts you've posted in the thread (not counting today, still looking at that) I do understand everything & more importantly "why" you did it as far as I can tell. But, I don't think I understand some of what the 'new' subfractals that are made possible (within a BBT1 for example) mean to you & why/how you conclude you need to handle them as far as maybe what needs to be resolved because of them. For example, in that down move from 1115 in BBT1 on 6/15 I see we can't FTT the down thing. To me, it meant that we need to fan it & are still in BBT1 (simply adding to the BBT1 roadmap of requirements for BBT2/3), and for that same reason the teal thing is all that matters to that point in real-time. I am interested in the faster viewpoint & what it told you, because I SEE it but I may be unsure if I know what you're saying it "means".

That's where I'm at. I feel somewhat comfortable & confident with the 3 BBT approach & my annotations are decent as far as getting to the minimum required components (with mistakes as well, at times, I'm sure!). But I can see our discussion will be better if I show that to you, so you could at least poke holes in some of my understandings. Which is fine by me, feel free of course. I'll post a chart segment with comments today.

 

[llIHeroic]

I stated before, IF you wanted to continue our dialogue, to post a chart you received so I could understand what you were learning from. I'm also personally curious how developed the coursework that you've stumbled upon for this method is.

You've decided not to comply for the reason that you'd prefer not to. I can respect your decision. However, I am not interested in extended discussion with someone who disregards basic requests and/or instructions just because they feel like it, and especially someone who wants to tell me how to run my own thread.

Once with the trend-line discussion of the teal container VE and again with posting the two day Traverse; I didn't feel like veering from the current intended topic of discussion in the thread, yet I acquiesced with your requests regardless. You've failed to reciprocate the same basic courtesy.

But I can see our discussion will be better if I...

I realize you have your own opinions about what would be most helpful for yourself. They might even be correct. However, this thread isn't about you, and I am going to develop it as I see fit. I am not willing to spend my time and effort catering to your personal agenda, or trying to help you along when you're too busy thinking about yourself to demonstrate a basic level of respect which I expect to be mutually present in a worthwhile exchange.

I'm sure you mean well, and perhaps an internet forum is just not a place where the two of us can communicate successfully amidst our differences in personality, values, and expectations. I find that is the case with most individuals here and myself. Best of luck to you.