Actually, I'm reposting without my pt3 as we are in a lateral movement, so it may still be looking for it..?
Iterative Refinement
- Thread starter Spydertrader
- Start date
Two ways to know ....
1. Thoroughly annotate a chart.
2. Read my answer when I post it tomorrow.
Which one requires no waiting?
- Spydertrader
#1 and I'm glad you're waiting till tomorrow - gonna think about this one. Many thanks to all those that posted drills!!!
Two bites at the apple, and one of your submissions has one fewer annotation than the other. Do you feel you have thoroughly annotated your chart?
- Spydertrader
Quote from Spydertrader:
You didn't really think I posted a chart from a random day now did you?
Do you feel you have posted a thoroughly annotated chart?
- Spydertrader
I would expect nothing less than a real mind bender (you do not disappoint)
Herein lies the dilemma for me... lat or no lat? Since I can clearly delineate tapes I chose no lat. I also did not include L1 gaussians.which I would have as B2B2R2B \/\/ (a L1 seq completion with final bar IBV close inside) But I gotta tell ya Spy, the lat is my problem here... The spike at the end does not help matters either.
EDIT: I am really torn between faster fractal non-dom traverse here or pace acceleration up (which would lend itself to a lateral here)... I chose the former. Can you throw in a preceeding sequence hint?
No, missed the tapes and the OBs (so far) - but its still not jumping at me that the obvious is wrong...
LOL! Looks good to me romanus. That is the PA route and seq completion. So possible bar 4 confirms PT3 and then PA. We run through the P/V sequence with IBV and change signal at the spike. So then the lat becomes irrelevant (in fact misleading) but noting PA is very relevant in this example. If this be the case then I chose unwisely