Thank you for the chart. Invaluable tool in my attempt to learn.Quote from Spydertrader:
See Attached.
es11252008.jpg
- Spydertrader
Quote from Atari:
What am I missing?

Quote from romanus:
would I be correct in stating that yesterday the market closed while being somewhere between p2 and pt3 in the sequence?
Bang! Flash grenade. AHA!Quote from Spydertrader:
1. You believe R2R developed by the 12:15 bar.
2. If so, then 12:20 must represent Point Two to Point Three.
3. If so, then 12:25 must represent Point Three (and into the channel).
4. If so, then surely the market showed a return to dominance.
5. Did it?
Quote from Atari:
Am I right to assume ... ?
Quote from Atari:
Am I making the correct distinction here?
Scratch that - totally wrong. RTL is broken on increasing volume.Quote from romanus:
Bang! Flash grenade. AHA!
If I apply the same though process to dark green (olive) up traverse which begins with black OB on 13:00 - then :
Since the 13:00 black OB bar on increasing volume does not represent a signal for change on 5 min ES Traverse Level, then what follows it (since no increasing volume red bars exist until 14:00) is a non-dominant component of the pink down traverse. A non-dominant component which is formed by means of faster fractal (sub-fractal) traverse.
In other words in real time the pink down traverse begins as orange, however due to the absence of signal for change on 13:00 OB bar - the sequence is not completed for a 5 min ES level traverse.
To me this represents the proof that a universal type of thought process exists which allows one to make correct evaluation of any context. A generalized approach that doesn't feel like it should be any more complicated than some of the basic geometry problems.Quote from Spydertrader:
I provided one way a trader can know for this specific example. I did not provide all the ways a trader should have known for this example. Nor did I provide the way a trader must know for every example.
I wish I had a better brain.Quote from romanus:
To me this represents the proof that a universal type of thought process exists which allows one to make correct evaluation of any context. A generalized approach that doesn't feel like it should be any more complicated than some of the basic geometry problems.
Quote from romanus:
P.S.I wish I had a better brain.
Quote from romanus:
Scratch that - <strike>totally</strike> partially wrong.