FWIW it's long been a practice of JH and Spyder to omit overnight hours because of the sharp decrease in liquidity; and "carry-over" the trends from yesterday's close to the next day.
I haven't quite figured out my charting software to be able to carryover channels from the previous day without the extended hours activity. I see the value in it.
Seems like we have the same major trend legs from the 13th. There's quite a few people who have gotten enough of the mechanics to produce correctly annotated charts with proper fractal integrity. After that point it's a matter of picking a resolution level to trade and trying to sift out the subtleties between the numerous times your fractal seems to have potential for completion and the few times when it actually does. Those waters are a bit murkier and tend to make or break the P/V trader from what I've seen.
You point out an area that was an extreme source of frustration for me to work out. I got caught in a thought loop of "gaussian sequences completing on a faster fractal before the next higher fractal can start."
Well from my debriefs, I found so many instances where that was not the case or where it was the case but I could not perceive it or I was perceiving it inaccurately.
The concept of jumping fractals brought some clarity.
One 'aha!' for me was to start building the tapes from 2 bars using light gray lines and building up the tapes, traverses, and channels more rigorously.
Annotating volume from three different vantage points helped me in a way the previously worked out volume annotations did not.
The first view is monitoring increasing/decreasing, B/R volume bar by bar.
The next view is picking out from this field the B2B and R2R's. This transformed previously confusing Gaussian formations "not completing" to non-dom traverses shifting to dominant traverses within a bar or perhaps over a series of bars. I'm looking to match the pt2 of the dominant to the short term gaussian peak.
The third view is viewing the resultant dominant channel.
Having the volume sequences make sense has been a welcomed insight.
Whether there's a final piece of this method that was never explicitly demonstrated, a certain degree of intuition is eventually required to perfect it, or there is just a greater noise-to-signal ratio on average in present day markets than in years past is up for debate in the community. The time when this stuff really shines the most is in volatile, high pace conditions in my opinion.
I think that is why Jack spent so much time talking about NLP pictures and performing MADA. Annotations are great, and I've found that the logging completes the method to build the mind and develop the intuition. It's also the hardest for me to perform consistently. It requires a stamina of concentration that I endeavor to increase.
Considering that there were successful P/V traders back in 2007 even with how unrefined the charts were back in then makes me lean toward a mixture of #2 and #3. I think in many ways the latest generation of P/V'ers has suffered from seeking mastery via over-complication of this stuff, myself definitely included in years past.
Your sentiment brings this to mind:
Isn't it strange how princes and kings,
and clowns that caper in sawdust rings,
and common people, like you and me,
are builders for eternity?
Each is given a list of rules;
a shapeless mass; a bag of tools.
And each must fashion, ere life is flown,
A stumbling block, or a Stepping-Stone.
R. L. Sharpe
I once had a short conversation with Jack; his later RDBMS system had mechanical rules; I entered and exited a trade exactly where they specified. When I looked at his blotter for the day I noticed he held the short past that point and it went another 5-10 points or something. I mentioned how the rules designated an exit at this specific point and asked him what made him hold the trade past that.
I'll never forget his response; "You've just got to know a reversal wasn't possible at that point."
I just started in on the thread: SCTlearning from Scratch.
Well, I found myself scratching my head on that thread,... always new concepts from Jack to stretch my thinking!
Glad to see some new blood finding value here. It sounds from your tone that you've been able to experience a degree of success with the method. Hope it keeps up. I've found consistency a lot harder to maintain than the initial success. Best wishes.
Thank you! I appreciate your response. Yes, I am experiencing success with the methodology. I understand it's boundaries as well as my own and can work with that.
Cheers!
