Iterative Refinement

[ljyoung]

Quote from guavaman:

This exercise proves trickier than one might think. For instance, it appeared to me a no brainer to have a lateral starting at 10:05 to 10:35, but Spyder's lateral started at 10:25 and lasted to 10:45 which would alter what was dominant and what was non dominant.

Wouldn't the IBGS at 10:10 have killed your lateral? The 10:25 lateral was like the one he elaborated to me about yesterday although I don't see why it persisted past the BO of the tape at 10:40

lj

 

[guavaman]

Quote from ljyoung:

Wouldn't the IBGS at 10:10 have killed your lateral?

It is my understanding that in order for an IBGS to kill a lateral it has to form in increasing volume.

 

[Spydertrader]

Quote from guavaman:

Looking for the Signal of Change at or around 10:05.

Lack of 'continuation'

Quote from guavaman:

Concerning 13:20, 13:25 and 13:30 all would have completed a traverse and provided a valid Signal of Change.

As you have pointed out, clearly the market had its own ideas with respect to which bars provided a signal for change and which did not. Something must have alerted the trader that change wasn't on the table.

What are the conditions where change cannot take place on the ES 5 minute Traverse level resolution. Once you understand what situations cannot ever provide change, then by process of elimination, you can locate which of the scenarios was at work here.

- Spydertrader

 

[Spydertrader]

Quote from ticktrade:

You appear to be having so much fun with my posts I thought it would be nice to offer you another oppotunity. I enjoy them, but if given a choice would choose a direct answer due to my current mental condition JK

I always provide a direct answer. The answers I provide are, quite often, not what people want, but they are what people need.

Quote from ticktrade:

1005 is pa and there is no return to red dominance until 1250.
soc at 1340 to long, no more irv after red dominant.
and change back short at 1425 PV.

Unfortunately, it isn't Pace Acceleration. Such an event occurs prior to the completion of a Traverse Sequence.

Quote from ticktrade:

another note. did not see a warning to exit before up move at eod

Sequence complete. WMCN? Did it?

- Spydertrader

 

[Spydertrader]

Quote from guavaman:

This exercise proves trickier than one might think. For instance, it appeared to me a no brainer to have a lateral starting at 10:05 to 10:35, but Spyder's lateral started at 10:25 and lasted to 10:45 which would alter what was dominant and what was non dominant.

You want to avoid placing a lateral across a 'transition point' on your charts. In other words, where one thing ends and another begins. Even with doing so, note dominance entering the lateral (red), and dominance exiting the lateral (black). Something changed.

- Spydertrader

 

[ljyoung]

Quote from guavaman:

It is my understanding that in order for an IBGS to kill a lateral it has to form in increasing volume.

You are right gman. My mistake. I thought it just had to pierce the boundary of the lateral.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2087759&highlight=IBGS#post2087759

lj

 

[Spydertrader]

Either place each other on ignore or avoid responding to each others' posts. Magna has quite enough work to do without cleaning up a mess created by oversized egos.

Thank-you in advance for your cooperation, and we return you now to our regularly scheduled programming.

- Spydertrader

 

[romanus]

Quote from Spydertrader:




Sequence complete. WMCN? Did it?

- Spydertrader

I take it that the sequence was not completed on 1535 bar and 1525 was not what I thought it was.

 

[Spydertrader]

Quote from romanus:

I take it that the sequence was not completed on 1535 bar and 1525 was not what I thought it was.

Correct. The Sequences completed at 15:45. With respect to 15:25, see my answer earlier today where 15:20 had to be a Point Two.

(All times Eastern and [close of] ES bar)

- Spydertrader

 

[Magna]

I will not allow this excellent thread, where people are working very hard, to degenerate into petty squabbles by children. Yeah, yeah, I know, "he started it... no... no... it was his fault.. he started it..." And rather than apologize later just don't mix it up in the first place. All disruptive posts have been removed and I ask that it be the last time I have to deal with such infantile shenanigans. If someone bothers you to the point you just can't stand it please use the IGNORE feature, that's what it is for. And a big thanks to all of you who didn't respond and went about your business.