Iterative Refinement

Quote from ljyoung:
Oh no. Not the 'sigh' guy, again.
It is always best, IMO, to declare the obvious before suggesting anyt'ing further. This also allows one to get a feeling for the level of comprehension of the topic being discussed by those who respond to the obvious. It also allows one to get some feeling for the level of comprehension that the poster is perceived to have by those who respond to the obvious.
In my case, of course, like Schultz in 'Hogan's Heros', "I know nothing."
lj
More...

Maybe it is the extreme opposite of nonsensical diatribe?




http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showt...ighlight=tape*+traverse*+channel*#post1945181

If you build from tapes... I am sure you can see what you have built.
 
Quote from Mr_Black:

What a day....
More...
:D How about that! Your data provider was kind enough to let you know that the trend has not changed by showing decreasing volume on 1440 eob (yours 2140 eob) on a bar that follows the formation BO on increased volume. So you knew that the FTT (peak volume) on 1420 eob (yours 2120 eob) is going to result in FBO.

My provider showed increased volume on that bar suggesting that the trend had changed and therefore to be expecting pt3 up.

:D This is what I call an unfair advantage.
 

Attachments

Quote from Mr_Black:

yeah...that's why i exit on this bar....:)
More...
Cool. I guess the :D victims of volume overreporting got stuck with "what wasn't that" on decreasing black volume 1455 eob (2155 eob your time)
 
Quote from Spydertrader:

Corrected.



We call it a channel because that is what the market says it is, and yes, a channel has yet to form at this point in time.



Corrected.



Corrected.




Not if you want to accurately describe the events transpiring to form a channel.



The same way all other bars fit into the P-V Relationship - as continuation or change.

- Spydertrader
More...

Thank you Spyder. I meant to add Lateral Movement to the 'missing annotation' collation and neglected to do so - a clerical oversight. I have no problem using the 'established' nomenclature.
What I should have said in points 4 and 5 is that at bar 22 we are starting to build a channel and that this construction was initiated by the VE of the traverse which runs from bar 8 to bar 21. You are saying that at the close of bar 22, the parallel line construct is still a traverse. This makes sense because we continue to build the channel after bar 22.
Let me hypothsize that bar 22 marked the end of the day and that the next day there was a huge gap up. Would you still consider the parallel line construction beginning at bar 8 and ending at bar 22 to be a traverse?
TIA
lj
 
Quote from ljyoung:

Let me hypothsize that bar 22 marked the end of the day and that the next day there was a huge gap up. Would you still consider the parallel line construction beginning at bar 8 and ending at bar 22 to be a traverse?
More...

You've created a hypothetical that does not exist in reality.

- Spydertrader
 
Quote from Tums:

Maybe it is the extreme opposite of nonsensical diatribe?




http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showt...ighlight=tape*+traverse*+channel*#post1945181

If you build from tapes... I am sure you can see what you have built.
More...

You are entirely too sensitve Tums if you deem what I said to be a diatribe. As to whether it is nonsensical, well, that's a matter of opinion and you know what they say about opinions.

I am well aware of the post to which you refer and understand it, I am sure, as well as you do. What I do not find to be beneficial, at least to me, is your 'sigh guy' routine. Hence an earlier request to be 'more specific' when expressing doubt as to what I have said.

lj
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top