Fractal Theory: Redux
- Thread starter llIHeroic
- Start date
The Handy Dandy Hershey Pocket Paper Calculator !!
Just pick a point and look at Volume. Find the correct face. You now see what came before and what should come next in trend. Find the price case. Stay on a face if one is cycling in the smaller polygon of laterals. As one comes to an End Effect, flip to the next face. If the volume is incorrect, then flip to the next face.
It's a tactile approach to understanding the cycling of Dom to non-Dom of the same price cases and the forward progression of trend.
A trend ends when interrupted by incr vol of the opposite. Thus a forward flip to new Dominant in opposite direction.
Have fun !!
Last edited:
The landscape of interlocking turns
(Sideways)
Each large diamond formation is all the potentials of a bar. These annotated turns are for a bar to bar trend fractal. (Tapes)
Think of it like hopscotch. DOM wall's block certain paths and price takes the path of least resistance.
Trend completing or being cut short. Starts price at SYM. In other words, go to next SYM, because you just had an EE or are on the way to one on a larger fractal.
Fractal = parallelogram price container of various sizes dependent on the independent variable.
(Sideways)
Each large diamond formation is all the potentials of a bar. These annotated turns are for a bar to bar trend fractal. (Tapes)
Think of it like hopscotch. DOM wall's block certain paths and price takes the path of least resistance.
Trend completing or being cut short. Starts price at SYM. In other words, go to next SYM, because you just had an EE or are on the way to one on a larger fractal.
Fractal = parallelogram price container of various sizes dependent on the independent variable.
Last edited:
Thank you very much for such an interesting post, Sprout. Would it be possible to demonstrate this concept on a chart?
Once again thank you for creating these diagrams.
On the top left quadrant, you have written '++V' below the HHHL bar. '-' is written above 'LLLH' bar.
Similar markings are written on each 'diamond.' Can you please elaborate as how to read these diagrams?
Thanks very much in advance.
We have the 10 price cases. 2 trigger permission to measure volume. As price forms the second bar, at some point it "locks in" the final form before bar close.
This "Lock in" can be observed under two conditions. Vol is incr or it's decr.
The third condition of vol being the same we put aside for now.
The context of the price cases are for form, not value. In other words we are filtering the volatility of price out of our context at the moment. The price cases are colored blue. However we are looking at the form and not whether the bar's are black or red from the dominant move of the bar.
We'll add these later but for now we assign the top half of the octahedron "diamond" as incr Price (green +) and the bottom half as decr Price. (red -) The top and bottom peak give permission to measure volumn.
The additional + on a face is for incr vol.
Whenever we have increasing volume have Dominance (blue +) Decr volume is non-Dominance.(blue - )
To read the diagram, start at SYM on the left side. As we monitor price changes. As price changes it moves in a pattern across the diagram taking different paths until "Lock in". When the path of price remains within the price containers Sym, ftp, fbp, hitch. That is the signal to WAIT.
This bar closes and the next one begins. We treat this new current bar as a SYM and start again at the left - Only if the last two bars were within the WAIT.
Else we flip the Dominant face (+V) to the non-Dom face (-V).
If what we see the market doing is not decr Volume, then we flip forward to the next face to watch price change in a new dominant direction. It's the same face (dominant) as before but this time we witness price change going in the opposite direction. However how we got here was through a secession of dom, non-dom, dom sequences.
The faces of the octahedron sequence D to nD to D to nD. Price also has a succession through it's faces - high volatility to Low Volatility to high volatility to low volatility.
It's better to work with "the pattern" first then a price chart to better understand it's capabilities and limitations.
Hth
Last edited:
With the above study aid, the logic of T2P, Not T2P, Not Not T2P (T2F, Not T2F, Not Not T2F) started to clear up for me.
Next, after some assistance from svrz and tiddlywinks, some flowcharts on EE's,...
Sounds like you're getting pretty comfortable with the RDBMS. A few of us have learned the system in it's entirety but were never able to get a consistent system of execution down based off the End Effects and Modrian Table outputs. The RDBMS was intended to have intra-bar actions and seems to require a good deal of intuition; often times what is listed as a D to D turn doesn't actually result in a change of sentiment. Numerous EE's signal and then you get a BM REV in the same direction. EE, Translation, and +PRV in one direction signaling an entry can sometimes collapse entirely before the close of the bar. The small losses and reversals tend to add up quickly.
If you're going to wait until lock-in or EOB to take actions, you need more user inputs like other TF's or additional rules to trade slower fractals to combat the inefficiency. This is where I've seen some people have moderate success, but by then it's a modification of the system and not the RDBMS itself. I kept doing this until I was pretty much annotating and trading like Spyder advocated and the RDBMS inputs really became peripheral.
All things considered, the leap from correctly categorizing everything at the point of lock-in to actually trading the system is what I was never able to do; as well as everyone else I've ever talked with that completed their study of the system. Keep us posted if you are able to make any consistent sort of execution with the volume events and data outputs. Seems like you're fairly close to mastering the MA of MADA for the RDBMS which is as far as I've personally seen anyone get, myself included.
If you're going to wait until lock-in or EOB to take actions, you need more user inputs like other TF's or additional rules to trade slower fractals to combat the inefficiency. This is where I've seen some people have moderate success, but by then it's a modification of the system and not the RDBMS itself. I kept doing this until I was pretty much annotating and trading like Spyder advocated and the RDBMS inputs really became peripheral.
All things considered, the leap from correctly categorizing everything at the point of lock-in to actually trading the system is what I was never able to do; as well as everyone else I've ever talked with that completed their study of the system. Keep us posted if you are able to make any consistent sort of execution with the volume events and data outputs. Seems like you're fairly close to mastering the MA of MADA for the RDBMS which is as far as I've personally seen anyone get, myself included.