Iterative Refinement
- Thread starter Spydertrader
- Start date
bi9,
Just looking at your chart (the one with the MADA amplification) I notice that the 10:10 bar marked 1, is red in color which just on a visual cue basis I would find distracting. This is the case because your bar color is determined in relation to the prior bar, i.e., the close on bar 1 is < open of prior bar. On the other hand the close on bar 1 is > than the open on bar 1 hence the volume bar is black and my guess is that the OTR tick chart will show a down-up-down movement with up predominating. The black-up movement would have clued me into the possibility of an FTT.
I appreciate that you may be aware of all that I've just said and if so please disregard what I've just said. Your visual "training" may simply be different than mine.
lj
Just looking at your chart (the one with the MADA amplification) I notice that the 10:10 bar marked 1, is red in color which just on a visual cue basis I would find distracting. This is the case because your bar color is determined in relation to the prior bar, i.e., the close on bar 1 is < open of prior bar. On the other hand the close on bar 1 is > than the open on bar 1 hence the volume bar is black and my guess is that the OTR tick chart will show a down-up-down movement with up predominating. The black-up movement would have clued me into the possibility of an FTT.
I appreciate that you may be aware of all that I've just said and if so please disregard what I've just said. Your visual "training" may simply be different than mine.
lj
Quote from Spydertrader:
"Make sure you only look at the YM when given permission by the ES, and make sure you always look at the YM when given permission by the ES."
bi9, I interpreted Spyder's words as different, but related statements. To paraphrase: you're supposed look at the YM only when given permission, and make sure you look at the YM every time you're given permission.
With regard to the pt3 you thought was coming, it seems like you had sort of made up your mind that the pt3 was on its way and you were looking for corroborating evidence to support your hypothesis (just a guess). This is more like expecting than anticipating ( I do it, too, all the time). We were both thinking the same thing at that moment, but when the YM gave that odd triangular harmonic (spike bar) as it FBO'd what was a sym pennant on my charting software, one might have viewed that as a signal for change depending his/her fractal. There was some volatility/volume stuff happening there, too. So if we were long we could potentially get back short. Doesn't matter much, as you identified correctly on the next YM bar that the pt3 wasn't materializing.
You said that you are sometimes fooled into taking action on the first sign of change, but I think you're acting properly when you take action as soon as you see change on your resolution. As i understand it, the trader is to take immediate action to get on the right side of the market and then find out the future. Once we see change and take action, sometimes we don't see another signal for change happen again for a while. We may hold for a few bars after we first took action. Other times, change happens again on the very next bar (or even intrabar). And even other times, we just read things incorrectly or missed a signal somehow and need to get on the right side asap.
I'm learning we have to be kind of loose and not fall into the trap of expecting the market to do what we thought it would do. Yes, we should anticipate, but our MADA should be as objective as possible so our eyes can see what's really there.
"Make sure you only look at the YM when given permission by the ES, and make sure you always look at the YM when given permission by the ES."
bi9, I interpreted Spyder's words as different, but related statements. To paraphrase: you're supposed look at the YM only when given permission, and make sure you look at the YM every time you're given permission.
With regard to the pt3 you thought was coming, it seems like you had sort of made up your mind that the pt3 was on its way and you were looking for corroborating evidence to support your hypothesis (just a guess). This is more like expecting than anticipating ( I do it, too, all the time). We were both thinking the same thing at that moment, but when the YM gave that odd triangular harmonic (spike bar) as it FBO'd what was a sym pennant on my charting software, one might have viewed that as a signal for change depending his/her fractal. There was some volatility/volume stuff happening there, too. So if we were long we could potentially get back short. Doesn't matter much, as you identified correctly on the next YM bar that the pt3 wasn't materializing.
You said that you are sometimes fooled into taking action on the first sign of change, but I think you're acting properly when you take action as soon as you see change on your resolution. As i understand it, the trader is to take immediate action to get on the right side of the market and then find out the future. Once we see change and take action, sometimes we don't see another signal for change happen again for a while. We may hold for a few bars after we first took action. Other times, change happens again on the very next bar (or even intrabar). And even other times, we just read things incorrectly or missed a signal somehow and need to get on the right side asap.
I'm learning we have to be kind of loose and not fall into the trap of expecting the market to do what we thought it would do. Yes, we should anticipate, but our MADA should be as objective as possible so our eyes can see what's really there.
LOL thanks for pointing that out. I re-read his sentence and it makes perfect sense.
Honestly I think I was doing exactly what the method tells us to do i.e. eliminate all possibilities until we are left with one possibility. When the point 2 formed on the ES I had two possibilities - a fanned out down channel and an up channel looking for a point 3. When price broke the sym pennant, the fanned down channel was more likely but as the red volume kept decreasing I eliminated the fanned channel scenario and was left with the one scenario - looking for a pt 3 up.
If I went short, I would be very unhappy as I don't like to go against the dominant direction (unless after a FTT on a Pt 3 channel) and also that ES bar ended up with lower red volume than the previous bar.
This is where I disagree a bit. Looking back the change signal I took did not apply at my resolution since that wasn't the real FTT of the retrace from point 2 to 3.
The problem is when I am waiting for a point 3 to form, I have trouble determining if a change signal applies to my resolution or not. If anyone can help I would appreciate it. Do we take each change signal and wash and repeat until the real change occurs?
For example take the trades from december I posted (http://tinyurl.com/2hhn5r) in my post to spyder. In both those trades, I was too early and had price go against me before going in the direction I expected. When the opportunity for the third trade came, I decided to be more patient and the first change was the actual FTT and I missed the trade.
Totally agree.
It wasn't like I was trying to go long when the market was screaming forest level dominant is down. Just trying to figure how to determine when the real change has arrived.
Attached is snapshot from a few minutes later @ 10:50:53 am and dominant is still up.
Thanks for you post.
bi9, Thanks for your reply. It looks like we're on different resolutions but saying a lot of the same things. One of my areas of difficulty is teleporting fractal to fractal (going to see Jumper, lol). Anyway, here's how I viewed things. It's not as pretty as yours, but hopefully it's clear. 
ES DAILY CHART FEBRUARY-15- 2008
Depending on one's resolution level, change can occur irrespective of Volume direction. In other words, if the next bar is increasing or decreasing Volume of a different color than the previous bar, then increasing or decreasing doesn't matter. Change still happened. In other instances, the market requires increasing Volume in order to signal change. Learning to 'see' the differences between these two scenarios may help you to 'know' when to seek out Volume as a leading indicator of Price, and when Price itself (in conjunction with context) provides the sufficient data set required.
- Spydertrader
Price made a lower low. Please describe how Price making a lower low could do so without Red (selling) Volume.
In addition, The market has indicated Price finds itself within a down channel. Price moves in the Dominant direction within a channel on increasing Volume. Price retraces within a channel on decreasing Non-Dominant Volume. Since we have increasing Volume in the dominant direction of a down channel, then we must have increasing red. Since we also have Price retracing within a down channel, we also have decreasing black after the Intra-bar gaussian shift.
- Spydertrader
I did not say that there was no selling volume but rather that in the down-up-down sequence, the end result was that price closed higher than what it opened. Hence if one uses the convention I described to "color" the bar, it would be at its close, black. If one uses the convention that bi9 uses to color the bar, it would instead be red.
lj