Has anyone else noticed this March - July 2010 daily chart pattern?

Quote from Algo_Design_Kid:

*Putting in long term memory*


By the end of August as the SP500 breaches 1200 if I do not hear or read a typed (or handwritten) apology from you I am going to unsubscribe from your newsletter. This time for good.


:)
More...

It is possible that you want to shoot the messenger. And that is just part of the humor of ET.

Take a look at Donna's suggestion to you for a second.

With respect to other things look at the scale on each pane. Look at the lines drawn on each pane.

Lets call rhis item 1. And check off a few inconsistencies. If you are using a semilog pane consider using lines that are compatible instead of the opposite. Similarly, you have the same reversed inconsistency on the volume pane. The pane is rectilinear and the line is exponential.

you may want to review the advantage of semilog panes. One advantage is to be able to make comparisons of equal percentage change by measuring equal distances; your boxes point out how erroneous your assurtiion is and others have pointed this out to you.

Read Pring and see why and how he belatedly joined the PC era. Focus particularly on two line analysis and histograms. There has to be a synchronicity with time and the default settings of the indicators. The invention and application of the PC affected this relationship as demonstrated by the belated shift Pring made.* Check this inconsistncy off as item 2 of the five.


Assume you begin to consult with your helpers on items 1 and 2. Assume you see what Donna means. Assume you deal with your non neutral bias and you can read shorts as you read longs. these things make you initial post in error.

For item 3 take a look at the first derivatives of the lines in your boxes intividually and in concert. There you see a few inconsistencies as well. the grossest ones are the vertical relative positions of the line pairs. They are simply opposite from each other box to box. These are just sub headings under item 3.

The order of events in a depression is well known. your boxes arecomparing two different elements of a depression, ech of which behave differently. Call this item 4.

For some reason you are not familar with the role of "context" when considering events. Many many people have brought this up in one of the other threads you originated; review their remarks, if possible.

Please put me on ignore; it is not a good idea to read or comment on my posts. My reason for posting is to point out to those who are striving to be able to see the markets, that iti very very important to be accurate. Your helpers are shirking their duties to hepl you.

*For a while in most two line indictaor discussion, I was the credited reference for the new setting. this was probably because I introduced it in the era of the beginning of the introduction of real time data tranmission.
 
Quote from Inciteful:

I'd have to give you a -10 in the real world Jack, you've never been able to prove you've made a cent through trading, and every single one of your followers has crashed and burnt.
More...

trader28 has re-arrived.

your comment above is one of the most humorous you've gotten off in ages.

why all the pm's. resist.

what if you had computer skills and could assemble the record?

what if you were really skilled and could reverse engineer?

what if you could take the reverse engineering and back it with capital?

where would that have put you a few years back? Not doing SPM which apparently made the Hall of Fame.
 
So what is the big item that has to be dealt with?

Item 5.

Assume all prior items are dealt with and this chart is the outer envelope of the actual money making strategy.

We deviate from a set of mediocre strategies to just one parent strategy that has application throughout all markets. This would be like a resolution of 10 years work in a scientific field devoid of induction. Sort like a "black swan" import but actually reasoned instead of just filled with "black swanness" induction.

This chart shows the information feeding the system and how various degrees of freedon are added to enhance and extend a human effort. Mankind has done this for eons.

Arrange all the information in columns. For starters make the adjacency meaningful. Sub group interrelated items and set the continuum in the order of "reading" the market.

for each column, establish the vocabulary in a decision making context.

Aside from this make up a cheat sheet to read the log for signals and their precidents and anticedents.

trading platforms only take a few signals. and making money is an absence of platform behavioral related signals. So make up a chaet sheet for making money.

All cheat sheets are expressed in terms of this chart used as a context and another chart(s) that carve the turns according to the significant time frame.

Now we have three sets of cheat sheets:

1. context

2. trading signals

3. making money signals.

Cheat sheets are answer sheets for the rows of the log which has columns according to the present degrees of freedom.

Look at the buy combo on the cheat sheet?

look at the hold combo on the cheat sheet?

what is the money making combo and how is it transmittd to the trading platform?

to tet out the log and the cheat sheets do the two boxes scenarios. Compare the rows of the two logs. now you see why the two boxes aren't comparable. you also see why the above cannot be transferred to an actual money making trading functionality.

For a repeat of this look at the history of redneck and do a before and after relative to his moment of revelation. Compare and contrast with kid algo design. Redneck has a three log version of KAD. He uses PA columns only. What do his cheat sheets look like for HOLD? Why doesn't he have a cheat sheet for wait and for reversal?

After processing this stuff, you get to what columns can be deleted and what columns have to be added? (This assumes all incorrect defaults have been hanmdled and all panes have ben made mathematically compatible.

Both these things change the timing of everything. But they do not eliminate the basic item 5 problem: the market dictates and the trader obeys.

A person starts out at age 16 with garbage in garbage out modus. He goes to age 26 going on 27 and is supported by talent who takes direction from him, he says. A decade has passed and he posts a product like we see in this thread.

Look at the cheat sheets. Is there an identity for two items: buy and sell. What single column is different for this to be an identity of two behavioral actions (or automated on an ATS)?

Is it ever going to be possible for there to be a general understanding that a neutral bias is required? Why doesn't PA trading evoke a neutral bias?

Why do people convince hemselves something works and something else doesn't work. Do they have any basis for anything?

Item 5 was a little bigger than the other items. thats how it turns out usually.

It was neat to see trader28 return and come up with a -10. Did he multiply -5 by two or something sophisticated like that? He should consider going semilog.
 
For n00bies, make up a log that has five columns on the right. Label them wait, buy, hold, reverse, and sell.

Divide the rest of the log into columns that help make the five decisions on the right.

As a starter put, from left to right leading indicators and the traded intrument's characterisitics you look at.

there are 10 to 12 leading indicators and a couple for the intrument you trade.

Create a vocabulary for each column. The five to the right are vocabulary terms: blank and "check". Blank means not signalled and check means do it now.

Make sure you have bar number and second columns right in the middle columns of your chart. Bars are divided into seconds.

No matter what you do or how you do it, you can only come to one comclusion about the markets and how they perform: there is an order of events.

Doing logging for any type of trading proves this to the logger.

the logger's job it to learn to make cheat sheets so that he knows he knoes when to check the last five columns on the right.

For old timers here there is an interesting thread that relates to a person who changed from one form of trading to another aftr many years of very hard objective work. I liked witnessing this happening yeras ago. This post is one that makes it possible for anyone to switch from before to after. Or for N00bies it makes it possible to save years and years of work.

The objective of trading successfully is to know you know.

The catylst for knowing you know you know is knowing that there is an "order of events".

Any successful trading method intrinsically or expressly states the order of events for that slice of learning the markets.

there are everal culminating learning realizations. Often there is asub order as well. Putting the pieces together is a statement of this kind of culminating realization.

Two sometimes mentioned culminating realizations are that a lot of edges can be summed to show how the markets work at all times and. also, the "feeling" of realizing "unconscious competence".

A part of either of these culminating experiences is the recognition of the order of events with respect to various pane displays.

I noticed this on each pane I invented over the years. When the PC came along panes became more easily mainfested. But it is worth noting that all the concepts for displaying panes came before the pane was used in PC's.

Tim Morge is an example of the pre pane/post pane phenomena.

So what is the bridge for a person who wants to fast track to the culminating experience of unconscious comptence. It is as expected "being able to see the markets". Before the PC it was done in super competent ways. this shows, simply, that PC's are not requireed. BUT, in fact, they are very convenient because they can be trained pane by pane to "show" what is needed to become unconsciously competent.

Trading is like driving a car. You DO NOT need to see the internals of an engine running to get optimally to your destination. Potential traders do not know how to put the hood down as we all see. They keep the hood up and do not get to their destination without tragic accidents.

to get somewhere in anything you have to know the order of events and particularly how to measure what you are looking at.

We see algo kid can't do panes so far and he is ten years into making messes.

A cooled Cray doesn't get answers either as the testimony of the financial industry speaks volumes. This is just unconscious incompetence, kind of the starting point for excellence where there is no excellence.

Conscious incompetence is not having a log or panes that display market information. Not having a vocabulary for each column of the log is also in the conscious incompetence category.

So getting your house in order is the basis of conscious competence. It is like learning addition and learning to ride a bike or ski or sail or fly.

Doing deals is fun especially when the other guy is using a calculator. Why do competing? conscious comptence is not a culminating level of performance.

Unconcious competence means you know you know (the order of events) and you go into the future a little ways where anticipation resides. It is not prediction like saying 1200 is whatever...darn it. that is just unconscious incompetence.

By building a bridge to inculcate the order of events, a person gets to live in "anticipation". demonstrating this to tradrzones almost shut his mouth forever but not quite.

When does a peson pass through the "zone" of going from diades to triads. It could not be done by any of the three T's. When does a person arrive at a left/right orientation of the markets instead of a top/bottom orientation?

For sure it is AFTER a person gets the "order of events" concept to be a conscious elment in his thinking.

why does it take four stages to go through maturing? Why does the mature expert person operate unconsciously in the end?

you all know the answers to these things because you use unconscious competence for non trading activities.

what is the block for you when it comes to trading?

The answer is very clear. "read" people's posts and see the reasons for the blockage. This IS the message of ET loud and clear.

Andrew Lo of MIT took the trouble to "prove" what and why the blocakge is there. It would be need if he could sidestep it as well. Getting the work around for Lo et all was fun.

So how can a person get past the blockage of fear, anxiety and anger? Hook yourself up to a PC and go through the process personally.
 
Quote from jack hershey:

It is possible that you want to shoot the messenger. And that is just part of the humor of ET.

Take a look at Donna's suggestion to you for a second.

With respect to other things look at the scale on each pane. Look at the lines drawn on each pane.

Lets call rhis item 1. And check off a few inconsistencies. If you are using a semilog pane consider using lines that are compatible instead of the opposite. Similarly, you have the same reversed inconsistency on the volume pane. The pane is rectilinear and the line is exponential.

you may want to review the advantage of semilog panes. One advantage is to be able to make comparisons of equal percentage change by measuring equal distances; your boxes point out how erroneous your assurtiion is and others have pointed this out to you.

Read Pring and see why and how he belatedly joined the PC era. Focus particularly on two line analysis and histograms. There has to be a synchronicity with time and the default settings of the indicators. The invention and application of the PC affected this relationship as demonstrated by the belated shift Pring made.* Check this inconsistncy off as item 2 of the five.


Assume you begin to consult with your helpers on items 1 and 2. Assume you see what Donna means. Assume you deal with your non neutral bias and you can read shorts as you read longs. these things make you initial post in error.

For item 3 take a look at the first derivatives of the lines in your boxes intividually and in concert. There you see a few inconsistencies as well. the grossest ones are the vertical relative positions of the line pairs. They are simply opposite from each other box to box. These are just sub headings under item 3.

The order of events in a depression is well known. your boxes arecomparing two different elements of a depression, ech of which behave differently. Call this item 4.

For some reason you are not familar with the role of "context" when considering events. Many many people have brought this up in one of the other threads you originated; review their remarks, if possible.

Please put me on ignore; it is not a good idea to read or comment on my posts. My reason for posting is to point out to those who are striving to be able to see the markets, that iti very very important to be accurate. Your helpers are shirking their duties to hepl you.

*For a while in most two line indictaor discussion, I was the credited reference for the new setting. this was probably because I introduced it in the era of the beginning of the introduction of real time data tranmission.
More...

Well lets see what happens.

I think this could be something to watch at least. Not that I spend my days with a microscope looking for fractals or anything. Just an observation.

And most of my OP was just a joke, except I really do think ZH is laughable at best.
 
Quote from proteinshake25:

wow!!! I was just looking at the same exact thing 2 days ago, made a post about it on the yahoo forums, except, I thought there was one more big dip to go. It's hard to tell
More...

Yeah, I mean it was just something that caught my eye. Although I did not see your post previously.

I really do think though that this DBLDIP shit is just for webclickz and bullshit.

I really do not see a double dip with 0 Fed Funds Rate. Although anything is possible.
 
So thats how all these money managers are coming up with 1200-1300 by end of 2010, based on that chart pattern. It doesnt matter how high the market goes the next drop will be as worse or even worse than the last one the markets experienced. I remember in 2007 when everyone was screaming buy, at that point it was too late and everything just fell apart. I am sure the SPX can get to 1250, 1300, 1475, 1550 and even 1800 but when its time for the next drop it will not be pretty. You will see the SPX below 1000 again sometime in the next few years.
 
Quote from S2007S:

So thats how all these money managers are coming up with 1200-1300 by end of 2010, based on that chart pattern. It doesnt matter how high the market goes the next drop will be as worse or even worse than the last one the markets experienced. I remember in 2007 when everyone was screaming buy, at that point it was too late and everything just fell apart. I am sure the SPX can get to 1250, 1300, 1475, 1550 and even 1800 but when its time for the next drop it will not be pretty. You will see the SPX below 1000 again sometime in the next few years.
More...

Then it sounds like a convincing argument to dollar cost average into at the very least?
 
Quote from NoDoji:

Actually I see a very similar pattern here as well, with everything that preceded it including the 200 EMA looking eerily deja vu-ish as well. :p
More...

What a joke this market is.....I can see this right shoulder going higher than the head with all the damn hope out there.

A JOKE!!!!
 
Quote from tradingbug:

What a joke this market is.....I can see this right shoulder going higher than the head with all the damn hope out there.

A JOKE!!!!
More...

Hi Bug!

Hope is all there is when the poor Emperor has no clothes :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top