You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Iterative Refinement
- Thread starter Spydertrader
- Start date
Quote from R/R:
lj: a few basics about the 12/2/08 chart you referenced may clear up the Channel question.
The blue up Traverse starting around 10:00 is accelerated with the green Traverse around 11:50 with the FTT around 12:30. Spyder also annotated a flatter gold FF up traverse for some reason, but let's ignore that for now.
Judging from this chart and not looking at earlier charts I know this up Traverse is the non-dominant leg building the red down Channel and sets it's point 3. Once the Channel starts it must complete before you can start a new one.
The down Traverse starting at 12:30 in your red circle does accelerate as it puts in the dominant leg completing the down Channel. It can't create a new Channel until the last one completes! WMCN will then be an up Channel when the market is ready.
At 14:30 the down Traverse completes and a new green up Traverse starts in your green circle. We assume the down Channel is finished as the up move accelerates with the blue Traverse through the Channel RTL allowing a new up Channel pt2 to be established with the common FTT of the green and blue Traverse (not shown on the chart).
So I must assume the Green Traverse by virtue of it's acceleration now becomes a Channel and Spyder annotates it as such (thick green line weight) retroactively.
hth
edit: there are two blue accelerated Traverses
<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2368018>
You are answering the question of why those two constructs on the left are traverses by saying, "... because they have to be. The thick red channel line says so." Most people know that to be so. Down-up-down traverse sequence for a downchannel and the opposite for an upchannel. Correct? Most of the time, but look at Spyder's chart on 2-3-09 and count the number of traverses in the upchannel.
You seem to be making a point about acceleration but all three of the circled entities accelerate in some form or another. How do we know they are accelerating? Because the slope of the contained price action steepens. What's 'causing' the acceleration? It has to be pace. What's causing the pace to accelerate at these points in time? I don't know. Ask the smart money. Is there anything different about the pattern of the accelerations? Looks to be so to my eye.
So what is left for me is this. The left bluetraverse terminates with a short uptape at the end of a fftraverse but price never pushes through the 'original' traverse P2. That, IMO, is what makes this a traverse.
The heliotrope downtraverse terminates with a pace-driven tape - a tape which blew through the 'original' traverse P2. Is it because proper completion was attained within the 'confines' of a tape that this construct is called a traverse? I don't know but will run with that thought for a while and test it further.
In truth, also really don't know what to say about the thick, green critter on the right . The other example you posted is contextually different. The annotation is different as well. The question remains the same. At what point did it become a channel and what makes it a channel? Why is it annotated differently than the heliotrope downtraverse? Why not have the traverse P1 and the channel P1 both be where the channel P1 is?
IMO, the solution to this problem is to do what a lot of folks are already doing which is to trade on fractals faster than the standard fractal AND rigorously annotate those fractals with supreme attention to the RTL (look at some of makosgu's stuff on the RTL). Jack has said we annotate from the faster fractal upwards and that makes sense. Sequences play out at all fractal levels. This slower fractal stuff is great fun to decipher but one can get burned if you don't have things down pat.
lj
Quote from ljyoung:
You are answering the question of why those two constructs on the left are traverses by saying, "... because they have to be.
I made no attempt to answer that question and if you re-read my post perhaps you will see my point.
Quote from ljyoung:
The thick red channel line says so." Most people know that to be so. Down-up-down traverse sequence for a downchannel and the opposite for an upchannel. Correct? Most of the time, but look at Spyder's chart on 2-3-09 and count the number of traverses in the upchannel.
No one ever said a Channel must end after 3 Traverses.
You are answering the question of why those two constructs on the left are traverses by saying, "... because they have to be.
I made no attempt to answer that question and if you re-read my post perhaps you will see my point.
Quote from ljyoung:
The thick red channel line says so." Most people know that to be so. Down-up-down traverse sequence for a downchannel and the opposite for an upchannel. Correct? Most of the time, but look at Spyder's chart on 2-3-09 and count the number of traverses in the upchannel.
No one ever said a Channel must end after 3 Traverses.
Quote from R/R:
04-05-09 12:40 PM
Quote from ljyoung:
You are answering the question of why those two constructs on the left are traverses by saying, "... because they have to be.
1. I made no attempt to answer that question and if you re-read my post perhaps you will see my point.
Quote from ljyoung:
The thick red channel line says so." Most people know that to be so. Down-up-down traverse sequence for a downchannel and the opposite for an upchannel. Correct? Most of the time, but look at Spyder's chart on 2-3-09 and count the number of traverses in the upchannel.
2. No one ever said a Channel must end after 3 Traverses.
Your point 1. Fair enough R/R. You did not actually say that but rather it was my reading and paraphrasing of your logic.
Your point 2. So I have learned. It seems to be a 1,3,5,... but not a 2,4,6, ... sort of thing.
Change of topic. What do you think about Jack's way of describing traverses as being composed of two tapes?
lj
04-05-09 12:40 PM
Quote from ljyoung:
You are answering the question of why those two constructs on the left are traverses by saying, "... because they have to be.
1. I made no attempt to answer that question and if you re-read my post perhaps you will see my point.
Quote from ljyoung:
The thick red channel line says so." Most people know that to be so. Down-up-down traverse sequence for a downchannel and the opposite for an upchannel. Correct? Most of the time, but look at Spyder's chart on 2-3-09 and count the number of traverses in the upchannel.
2. No one ever said a Channel must end after 3 Traverses.
Your point 1. Fair enough R/R. You did not actually say that but rather it was my reading and paraphrasing of your logic.
Your point 2. So I have learned. It seems to be a 1,3,5,... but not a 2,4,6, ... sort of thing.
Change of topic. What do you think about Jack's way of describing traverses as being composed of two tapes?
lj
For those who might be interested this is what I am referring to: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2127797Quote from ljyoung:
... Jack's way of describing traverses as being composed of two tapes?
Here is the page reference. It is the penultimate post: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showt...61&perpage=6&highlight=traverse&pagenumber=26
lj
For those of you willing to get a simple explanation of differences between sympathetic and papasympathetic modes of the autonomic nervous system. (10th minute into the lecture)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFj7rotVM8I&feature=SeriesPlayList&p=1D6C5FC9E7B57AF3&index=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFj7rotVM8I&feature=SeriesPlayList&p=1D6C5FC9E7B57AF3&index=1