Iterative Refinement
- Thread starter Spydertrader
- Start date
Incorrect. The ES 10:10 [close of] Bar signals that the market has yet to leave the non-dominant mode, and as such, has not yet completed its sequence. Since no mode change occured on the ES 10:10 [close of] Bar, The ES 10:15 [close of] Bar shows an increase in Pace (rather than Peak Volume).
We do not have permission to seek a change in mode as the sequence has not completed.
Incorrect.
The bar is black, Volume has increased, but now the market informs the trader to expect an upcoming pace change (after this bar). In other words, the trader should know by the close of the ES 10:15 bar that the market has yet to have reached its 'trough' required from the previous pace change (ES 9:50 [close of] Bar) and, prior to, reaching its expected 'trough' another pace change developed. As a result, the trader anticipates additional non-dominant movement. The trader also knows the three ways non-dominant movement can manifest itself (pennant, lateral or retrace).
Incorrect. Not too long ago, I posted several examples of Laterals. In a recent post, I prodded people to learn how to expect upcoming Lateral Movement. Perhaps, I have already provided the tools required to complete this task - how to know what must come next.
Incorrect. When such an event as you describe develops it is a direct result of a trader failing to monitor correctly. The market is always right. Something has been missed, and it is the trader who missed it. When this happens, locate a point in time (it might develop much later in the day) where you know the market has not only provided a change signal, but also, created sequences, moving forward from that change signal, which fit everything you know. Work your way back from this known point in time to the location which created the confusion to understand what the market has said it must be. Here is where you'll find the conflict from what you think you know to what the market has said is. Differentiate what you appear to see from that which is and seek the clues which, signal the subtle difference.
Note - this exercise requires a shift in mentality from 'trading mode' monitoring (following the sequences to locate the mode changes at the appropriate times) to 'learning mode' monitoring (attempting to understand where errors resulted via differentiation).
The ES 10:15 [close of] Bar begins a Lateral Formation, and ES 10:35 [close of] Bar signals the trader to expect another. However, ES 10:50 [close of] Bar represents a far different thing than ES 10:30 [close of] Bar. Doesn't it?
The Lateral ends with two closes outside the Lateral Boundary, but The ES 10:40 [close of] bar does not provide a signal for change. In addition, The ES 10:35 [close of] Bar indicates what to expect next - in a similar fashion to what already transpired this morning.
Correct.
Incorrect. Perhaps now, you can answer your expected questions as to why The ES 11:40 [close of] Bar, The ES 11:45 [close of] Bar and The ES 11:50 [close of] Bar did not provide signals for change.
- Spydertrader
ES 5 minute Sept 15 08
ES 5 minute
Same Day that I posted (possibly the day before).
Whatever you feel best suits your needs. However, I have noticed a certain progression which occurs whenever you walk though things 'out loud' in the thread. It would be a shame to see you abondon that which has provided you a benefit in the past.
- Spydertrader
Thank you Spyder for your detailed response to my questions.
Clearly the problem with my monitoring began early on with the adduction that the increase in volume of the 10:10 bar validated a P3 at 10:05. For me anyways, the information you have presented this AM demonstrates further the simplicity of this method, but only when one knows what to look for. So, if you will, let me see if I can extract the pertinent points.
AT 10:05 the dominant mode is long and we know this is so because the 9:50 black bar still has the greatest black pace. The 10:10 bar has a small increase in pace. The 10:15 bar shows a pace jump BUT it is less than the 9:50 bar. Pace jumps indicate impending lateral movement when the magnitude of the pace value is less than the dominant pace bar.
The 10:40 bar does not provide a SFC (signal for change), nor would we expect it to because the 10:35 bar shows yet another pace jump of lesser magnitude than the 9:50 bar. Thus again we expect lateral price movement.
The 10:50 bar is an OB which calls for a reset. There is no formation present at this point in time.
The 10:55 bar shows another jump in pace BUT this time the magnitude is greater than that of the 9:50 bar. We now have a signal for change (peak volume) because the pace of the 10:55 is greater than the pace of the 9:50. Go short.
You asked me a couple of questions which I will now attempt to answer.
1. The 10:50 bar represents a far different thing than the 10:30 bar. Doesn't it? The 10:50 bar is an OB not associated with a lateral and as well shows an IBGS/JW which says to go long (but we should be long anyways). It is also a possible P3 BUT this is not borne out till the next bar, the 10:55 bar, which I've described above. In contrast, the 10:30 bar is the second bar of a sym pennant present inside a lateral formation.
2. Why (did) the 11:40-50 bars not provide signals for change? I don't know why you picked those bars in particular but, whatever, in all cases the pace was less than the pace of the dominant red bar. In fact it is not until 15:30 that we have a red bar with higher pace. So one could comfortably just stay short until that time. Correct?
lj
Clearly the problem with my monitoring began early on with the adduction that the increase in volume of the 10:10 bar validated a P3 at 10:05. For me anyways, the information you have presented this AM demonstrates further the simplicity of this method, but only when one knows what to look for. So, if you will, let me see if I can extract the pertinent points.
AT 10:05 the dominant mode is long and we know this is so because the 9:50 black bar still has the greatest black pace. The 10:10 bar has a small increase in pace. The 10:15 bar shows a pace jump BUT it is less than the 9:50 bar. Pace jumps indicate impending lateral movement when the magnitude of the pace value is less than the dominant pace bar.
The 10:40 bar does not provide a SFC (signal for change), nor would we expect it to because the 10:35 bar shows yet another pace jump of lesser magnitude than the 9:50 bar. Thus again we expect lateral price movement.
The 10:50 bar is an OB which calls for a reset. There is no formation present at this point in time.
The 10:55 bar shows another jump in pace BUT this time the magnitude is greater than that of the 9:50 bar. We now have a signal for change (peak volume) because the pace of the 10:55 is greater than the pace of the 9:50. Go short.
You asked me a couple of questions which I will now attempt to answer.
1. The 10:50 bar represents a far different thing than the 10:30 bar. Doesn't it? The 10:50 bar is an OB not associated with a lateral and as well shows an IBGS/JW which says to go long (but we should be long anyways). It is also a possible P3 BUT this is not borne out till the next bar, the 10:55 bar, which I've described above. In contrast, the 10:30 bar is the second bar of a sym pennant present inside a lateral formation.
2. Why (did) the 11:40-50 bars not provide signals for change? I don't know why you picked those bars in particular but, whatever, in all cases the pace was less than the pace of the dominant red bar. In fact it is not until 15:30 that we have a red bar with higher pace. So one could comfortably just stay short until that time. Correct?
lj
Spyder, any chance of you posting your chart? Thanks.
One Bar represents a 'trough' with respect to volume, and the other represents a return to dominance.
I chose those three bars for a very specific reason. Your question, prior to, my words directing you to these bars questioned the value of adding a Lateral beginning at The ES 10:55 [close of] Bar. Follow the sequences forward, first with a Lateral, then without, in order to determine the correct method of annotation for this area. Once you perform the exercise, you should then know the answer to your question (whether or not to add a lateral), but more importantly, you should also know the reason why.
- Spydertrader