Iterative Refinement
- Thread starter Spydertrader
- Start date
Hi R/R,
Thank you for your comments. They have been very helpful. I have several questions.
It would seem reasonable that in order to have an accelerated tape you must first have a tape to which the accelerated tape can be compared. So you just can't start out with an accelerated tape. Correct?
The second question is in your snippet.
The third has to do with the underlined, italicized statement. I have several different pictures in my head of what this might mean ALL relating to the RTL of the tape. Is that what you are talking about? Could you explain this in more detail?
Finally with respect to the second type of fanning, this sounds like fanning to encompass the early portion of a retrace before the slope turns negative. Is this correct?
lj
That's why I mentioned the slope. If it goes negative then you would HAVE to have a tape break. What R/R seemed to be saying, I don't know if that it what he was saying and hence the question, was that you could fan as long as the trend was still going up. So maybe a lower high but higher low kind of thing.
lj
Quote from ljyoung:
Can anyone tell me why one of these is a traverse and one is a channel? The trivial answer that the traverse is completing a downchannel does not address the real reason but merely states the obvious. This isn't a quiz or a rhetorical question, simply because I don't know the answer. This was Spyder's penultimate chart chart and still uses LM's and the "P" notation, both of which were dropped in his final posting of 2-3-09. I mention this because it shouldn't be necessary to use these aids to come up with the answer. I have backed off my 'channel carryover fixation' and so this question has nothing to do with that.
Following R/R's useful input yesterday, I have tried to take the two things he said (one of which, like guava, I'd never come across before)and apply it to figuring out when a tape becomes a fftraverse and how these species are incorporated into the construction of a complete 5 min ES traverse. But me still can't 'see' WTF is the difference between the heliotrope and forest green constructs or likewise what the heliotrope and dark blue constructs share to make them both traverses.
IMO, looking back at what Spyder has posted and trying to understand what certain, selected features mean will be more fruitful than simply posting EOD charts.
lj
Just speaking for myself, I find rhetorical questions (from Wikpedia: Rhetorical questions encourage the listener to reflect on what the implied answer to the question must be.) , in whatever form, to be singularly useless as a teaching tool. There is a tacit assumption that the person asking such a question 'has the answer' and while in some cases this may be true, more often than not it isn't, and thus just adds to the lack of understanding. So if someone is going to answer my question with a rhetorical one, please spare me. Speak your mind and stick your neck out.
I haven't looked at ET for many days and I just did a search on "hershey", the word to look for red folders. Nothing is going on these days.
By happenstance I saw a thank you from some person to another with regard to a significant readable. I also recognized the chart from memory and it is a significant chart to me considering the past couple of years.
I view you as a person who wishes to go from A to B. Not my A or B, but yours.
In trading, trading becomes very easy because it is a process that is fully automatic for the trader who has become "differentiated". It does not come from the process of asembling a set of rules that are collected over time as an intellectual process of the collector.
Instead, it comes from iterative refinement of the mind. In urban architecture and planning it is called "infill". The mind makes requests for what it needs to infill what is missing.
Because, currently, I cannot see very well, I asked Liz to go through five charts and give me 5 or 6 trades per day based upon the chart. Next we filled in a price column, so We could determine the effectiveness of the original list. Our goal was to create 400K annual incomes in half a year of trading beginning with a lump sum. To do this we needed to add contracts and go flat at 40 contracts.
Blue, heliotrope and green. Am, midday and pm. Pace A, B, A.
Each elipse has a couple of trades, give or take. Lots of profit segments in each.
I didn't look at the chart in detail simply because I "knew it" from memory and it's contribution to my understanding of my patnership with the market is significant. I also couldn't see it very well.
The same mental differentiation works for each elipse.
Q 1. The difference is pace. The message is this: Two things contribute to trading: context and signals. Q 1 is a context question. The trades in the contexts are given from the same signal order of events.
Q 2 The similarity is the order of events in the elipses. the message is this: Two things contribute to trading: signals and context. Q 2 is a signal question. The signals in the same contexts are given from the same signal order of events.
Originally, meaning a while back, WMCN was on the table and, humorously, it became WTF.
How does a person get from A to B? My A and B which are incoherence and coherence. Answer: By doing purposeful drills is my answer. Do elipses with the circle described below.
In 30 minutes, Liz and I did five days trading at channel level. She used a vertically placed opaque ruler to "call" the entry, reversals and cover. She said two things: Bar # and long or short. Next using the ruler horizontally she read off the closing price of the pertinant bars. She read the day's total by mentally tallying the 5 to 7 numbers which were the profit segment values.
The context is an elipse's contents for you at this point of your WTF mental orientation (incoherent). The partnership with the market comes from your unconscious "knowing that you know" (you have that down cold and it is not being allowed to help you because you do not let your "sensing" contribute to your perception simple because your inference (90%) is only from your consciousness which wipes out, totally , the right answers from your unconscious.
"knowing that you know" is available to you from all the work you already have done. The drill of the moment for you is a simple one. Do the following circle:
Get "tells">>>>accept the tells>>>>let "Trust" appear>>>>>let value come into the picture. repeat and it becomes a drill ofr building your mind.
When a tell comes, don't ask questions, listen and accept instead. If a question comes up, listen harder and do not write the question down; you already have the answer, anyway.
feel how different it becomes for you. see your standard attitude allow a different thing in the space for a change. It is called Trust. A partnership requires that you trust your partner. In this case, the market does not need to trust you.
You will find the value of this trust when you are trading 40 contracts as a consequence of being coherent. "Knowing that you know" is what coherence is and it comes from the inference of the mind blending with the sensory input to form "perception".
When you "see" the market unfolding, bar by bar, you get to see one context that repeats in nested fractals where WMCN is always to same. Few signals arrive and they are widely spaced.
If you were playing the market's events on a piano, you would only need two white keys and two black keys: try A and B.
I answered your Q's and I did not ask a rhetorical Q yet.
Why would I? You don't get the purpose of rhetorical Q's because you will not give your mind a chance to become differentiated the way it demands to become differentiated. Be coherent and go with the flow.
I hear what you are saying guava but what I was trying to get at here was what did the two traverses have in common which made them traverses and also what was it that made the second traverse, a traverse and not a channel. So let me split this up and take the second part first.
What I am calling a channel here is the critter on the far right and me calling it a channel is based on Spyder's clear statement that in his schemata, upchannels have maximum thickness green lines. So what it looks like to me is one of those "a traverse which became a channel" thingys and my question is why is this the case.
Both of the constructions are initially formed by a pair of tapes, [down-up and up-down] so no difference there. Then both of them blast through the RTL with high pace bars, again no difference. Differences then begin to emerge with respect to the manner in which the market confirms the P3 and that is another discussion for another time but let me say that I believe that pace shows itself when this happens.
I don't know if this is correct and so I'm asking other people what they think.
With respect to why the traverses are traverses, again I believe this has to do with pace.
lj
Thank you Jack for your interest. You are quite correct when you say that we do not share a common view on the utility of rhetorical questions or process learning.
With respect to assembling a set of rules let me say this. We have recently been talking about the discussion Spyder had with some of the crew at the NYC Expo concerning the construction of tapes. Now perhaps I'm missing the point but stating something to the effect that "You only draw an accelerated tape when the close of the price bar is beyond the LTL of the previous tape.", sounds suspiciously like a rule.
Now it may well be and probably is the case that there is some underlying essential truth, dare I say rule of the market, which if someone possessed it would allow them to 'unconsciously' know that this would be so without having to think about it. Let me go further and say that I know that this is the case. What you and I don't agree on is how one gets to this state of mind.
So when you tell me that what I have to do is the 'circle' drill you described, my first question, if I knew nothing, would be what are the tells that I'm supposed to be getting. How can I develop trust if I don't know what the tells are? and blah and blah.
Well I do know somethings and one something is that pace is the leading indicator. Another is that WMCN and IBGS are the prime considerations of the SCT method. I understand that context and signals are inextricably linked.
So what I'm trying to do Jack, in a way which is clearly quite different from what you espouse, is to reach that state of mind, that mental condition by applying tried and tested rules of scientific judgment on the material at hand. Science is based on rules and definitions and their application to discovering the unknown. All theory is subject to experiment. Period. Experiment validates new ways of thinking
I have been battling the status quo/CW bullshit mindset all my life but I would not say that my way of doing it is the only way. I am absolutely sure that there are others. Lest there be any misunderstanding, I hold your thoughts in high esteem. It's your teaching method that I cannot accept.
lj
Hi lj,
this may sound to simplistic but my understanding would lead me to believe the following. The green point one marked the end of the thick red down channel. What has to happen when one thing comes to an end, another thing is beginning, that is , another thick up channel. So, instead of starting the traverse with medium weight he started with thick knowing a larger channel was starting. I may be wrong but the logic seems to fit.
gooch87