Making JH' SCT and all his material alive
- Thread starter WchPl
- Start date
The path you are traveling regarding Gaussian coupled with EE is misguided.
Gaussian has it's own sequence, for example without regard for waits, and also for an example, the "ability" for more than one gaussian sequence segment, even a complete gaussian sequence, to occur in a single bar.
Contrast that with RDBMS where permission is REQUIRED for bar analysis, plus, for lack of a better term, the "reusable" nature of the various RDBMS labels. For instance, P1, P2, T2P, P3P, as well as certain HVBO and other EE's, are all TECHNICALLY equivalent in relation to a gaussian segment. The same is true for T1, T2F, P3F and certain other LVBO and other EE's. Also, as an important reminder, RDBMS is based on segments. And one RDBMS segment COULD BE one or more gaussian segments because Guassian is based on fractals.
Each of the foundations, TL, gaussians, and RDBMS all work together. But each is a standalone analysis, combinable, but with the restrictions of JH rules for the particular analysis.
Gaussian has it's own sequence, for example without regard for waits, and also for an example, the "ability" for more than one gaussian sequence segment, even a complete gaussian sequence, to occur in a single bar.
Contrast that with RDBMS where permission is REQUIRED for bar analysis, plus, for lack of a better term, the "reusable" nature of the various RDBMS labels. For instance, P1, P2, T2P, P3P, as well as certain HVBO and other EE's, are all TECHNICALLY equivalent in relation to a gaussian segment. The same is true for T1, T2F, P3F and certain other LVBO and other EE's. Also, as an important reminder, RDBMS is based on segments. And one RDBMS segment COULD BE one or more gaussian segments because Guassian is based on fractals.
Each of the foundations, TL, gaussians, and RDBMS all work together. But each is a standalone analysis, combinable, but with the restrictions of JH rules for the particular analysis.
So you confirm what I had understood. The « OR », so what I had named the alternative, is for the fact that the trough we search for can either be on prior bar or before prior bar.
Sorry about the redundance, it’s for me : on is for « on bar n », while before is for « prior/earlier to bar n » = possibly n-1, n-2 etc.
What I feel when reading your post, is that there are like 2 kinds of D nodes. The one located on n bar, and the one located before n bar.
But first I must say, and this is certainly due to a lack of english understanding from me, but I may have misunderstood the sense of « lookback ».
I realize this now that I read :
Which Node D is « On » ?
Which Node D is « Before » ?
Upto now, I have considered D node to be an « action » node. The action was for me « look backwards ». The way you talk about Node D here, makes me see it now rather like a point or a space.
And here comes a little Aha…
From the MADA doc :
D is a point at the end of a bar.
Holly fuNk… A POINT.
I understand it as « D is a moment at the end of a bar at which you search for the reference trough ».
And here, would then appear the alternative : either the reference trough is on n bar, either it’s before n bar.
Immediately I wonder : can a bar before an n+1 that has either F/G status, not be a trough ? From my DD, it cannot.
So, why would there be two different D nodes ?
My current DD is that we do not only search for a mere trough in the past. Instead, we search for the REFERENCE trough.
From what I’ve DD so far, the reference trough must be the one that initiated the trend.
If I let the flow of my thoughts go and with the risk of being wrong, I’d say :
I remember Cycle 1 is for taking the Dom FFs of the TF. Being as in the Cycle 1 we exit when non-Dom appears EXCEPT if this non-Dom remains above prior trough, it means some troughs can be contained inside the FF, but only one is the reference trough. And for now, what I Dd is that this reference trough is the trough that initiated the FF so that initiated the first Dom leg of the FF we’re taking the Dom legs of.
This would lead one sometimes to have D node on prior bar, other times before prior bar.
I need to deeper think about, hone, and reconsider what I just said. This is dense for me.
To be continued…
I appreciate the quality of your message, will take it into a count and give you thanks for that.
In reference to “On OR Before”, your answer is in your write-up.
A bar before n would be n-1, n-2, etc. Node D has two places that it’s referenced, that’s the ‘OR’.
Which Node D is ‘On’?
Which Node D is ‘Before’
In an effort to hone, feed, reconsider and finally understand that node D : what dissonates to me is that there are two ways of understanding the « Node D has two places that it’s referenced ».
It could be
- There is only one Node D all the time, and it either is on n bar or it is before n bar.
Or
- There are always two Node D, and to pass from B/C to F/G we always only use the last one which is the reference.
I also think about it as « node D has two places » = There is a D Node on n bar and there is another one which is before. What I don’t get for now is if D node is always ONLY at a given place. A place that is one out of two possible ones.
What I also think is that, a bit like some EE’s have in the past appeared to me as clearer when encountered directly on the market = on a chart, what could help me would be to try to fill a log for Cycle 1, now I have PRV running up. Either this will lead me to clearer view of D node and maybe more, or it will not. Anyway, attempting to fill the special log for Cycle 1 cannot be a bad thing.
Let’s see what it yields.
... I talked too quick.. It will technically be quite impossible for me until next Monday.
I took 2 days off. It was necessary. Smoking cessation is hard these days.
The way I see D now, is that it’s a point at the end of an n+(at least)1 bar that follows an n bar that was either under B or C status.
Reviewing the Cycle 1 softened version 3 by JH, I’d say that :
B goes to F, C goes to G. To pass from B to F, we need D conditions to be filled. D conditions is finding a trough on prior bar (n) or before. At first sight, what I see here is that there will ALWAYS be a trough on bar n or before. I DD that even though there will always be a trough on prior or before prior bar, the D node searches for a specific trough. I think it’s the reference trough, and according to what I recently posted, it would be the trough that initiated the trend we’re in a non Dom leg of.
The question would be to ID the reference trough in question. But wherever this trough is, how could D conditions not be met at any n+1 bar following a n bar = B/C status ? So could B/D status be found on several bars in a row if the prior DD was true ? NO, it could not. So this way of understanding D node would impede a repeat of B/C to happen. So, let’s begin again.
So B/C must be able to surge several times in a row. This would be the continuation of non-Dom, and that’s where, I assume, Cycle 2 would be what would make us take advantage of this move.
We’re in Cycle 1 so we exclusively focus on Dom moves.
I know B goes to F, and C goes to G. When we pass from B to F, or from C to G, it means both D and F/G conditions, depending upon the destination node is, are met. That’s what I understand.
I am pretty clear with F conditions and G’s. To have an n+1 bar that makes us enter, we need to meet D conditions AND either (have at sec288 an increasing vol bar compared to n bar w/ color change) or (have at sec288 an increasing vol bar compared to last midday’s peak).
D node is described as the node that establishes the reference trough. This reference trough can either be on prior bar or it can be before prior bar.
It has recently been mentionned that one must ask oneself :
Which Node D is ‘On’?
Which Node D is ‘Before’?
There is no way these questions cannot lead to DD there are 2 kinds of D nodes, or there are 2 D nodes, however we call them.
Now something more that I wonder is : are there at each and every time we look back at beginning of n+1 bar, 2 D nodes that are backwards along the path AND we’re to select the one that is the reference = the one that initiated the trend that has its non-Dom leg just finishing ? (if F/G conditions are met of course)
OR
Is there each time we lookback at the beginning of n+1 bar, only ONE D node, which is, at times on prior bar, and at other times before prior bar ?
I can’t clear up for now this issue in the understanding although I’ve built on what I knew for sure and went back recently to last kown good.
From my current LOU, I’d say there are two different possible happenings.
Either after IDing prior trough and distinguishing which of the « 2 D nodes » it is, then at 12sec PRV of the current n+1 bar exceeds prior midday’s peak (1) or it remains below (2).
If 1, then we have C>>D>>G and we enter and hold for L etc..
If 2, then we have C>>C.
I wanted to have a break, but I finally thought about something.
Ok. I’ve just had another little Aha. D node is a point at the end of a bar (cf MADA doc). I had not understood this statement completely nor concretely up to now.
Even though I have previously mentionned the little Aha I had had about the fact that D node was a point at the end of a bar, I had not realized up to now that the word « action » was uncounsciously still stuck into my mind with the D node. As we say in my language, les vieilles habitudes ont la peau dure (old habits have hard skin)…
So, if D node is a point at the end of a bar it means in my mind now that D node IS a bar, or better said some bars ARE a D node.
And D node bars are the bars that are troughs. Rephrased, D node bars, are bars bounded on the left and right by higher bars.
The way I see and sense the being of D node reminds me the retro action we, sometimes, are to perform inside a lat when Lat4 is in the shadow.
So D, according to what I just said is the name in Cycle 1 terminology for bars that are troughs, when trough means a trough in terms of form, not a merely decreasing move. Any trough is, compared to before, a decreasing one, but not all decreasing moves are troughs.
Moreover, how I see D node now clears up a bit why in some exposed-as-true paths linking A to F for instance, D was sometimes not present. It must be because it’s an implicit gate. Passing B to F implies D. Maybe D was not always put along the paths in the ExSc thread because of its implicitness aspect.
Now the thing is : when a bar is determined as being a B or C, then we wait. It’s EOB now. So next one begins. 12 seconds later, we look backwards and search for D node. I wonder : which D node ? The last one ? Or the reference one, in the sense that « the 2 in R2R/B2B ? ».
To be continued…
The way I see D now, is that it’s a point at the end of an n+(at least)1 bar that follows an n bar that was either under B or C status.
Reviewing the Cycle 1 softened version 3 by JH, I’d say that :
B goes to F, C goes to G. To pass from B to F, we need D conditions to be filled. D conditions is finding a trough on prior bar (n) or before. At first sight, what I see here is that there will ALWAYS be a trough on bar n or before. I DD that even though there will always be a trough on prior or before prior bar, the D node searches for a specific trough. I think it’s the reference trough, and according to what I recently posted, it would be the trough that initiated the trend we’re in a non Dom leg of.
The question would be to ID the reference trough in question. But wherever this trough is, how could D conditions not be met at any n+1 bar following a n bar = B/C status ? So could B/D status be found on several bars in a row if the prior DD was true ? NO, it could not. So this way of understanding D node would impede a repeat of B/C to happen. So, let’s begin again.
So B/C must be able to surge several times in a row. This would be the continuation of non-Dom, and that’s where, I assume, Cycle 2 would be what would make us take advantage of this move.
We’re in Cycle 1 so we exclusively focus on Dom moves.
I know B goes to F, and C goes to G. When we pass from B to F, or from C to G, it means both D and F/G conditions, depending upon the destination node is, are met. That’s what I understand.
I am pretty clear with F conditions and G’s. To have an n+1 bar that makes us enter, we need to meet D conditions AND either (have at sec288 an increasing vol bar compared to n bar w/ color change) or (have at sec288 an increasing vol bar compared to last midday’s peak).
D node is described as the node that establishes the reference trough. This reference trough can either be on prior bar or it can be before prior bar.
It has recently been mentionned that one must ask oneself :
Which Node D is ‘On’?
Which Node D is ‘Before’?
There is no way these questions cannot lead to DD there are 2 kinds of D nodes, or there are 2 D nodes, however we call them.
Now something more that I wonder is : are there at each and every time we look back at beginning of n+1 bar, 2 D nodes that are backwards along the path AND we’re to select the one that is the reference = the one that initiated the trend that has its non-Dom leg just finishing ? (if F/G conditions are met of course)
OR
Is there each time we lookback at the beginning of n+1 bar, only ONE D node, which is, at times on prior bar, and at other times before prior bar ?
I can’t clear up for now this issue in the understanding although I’ve built on what I knew for sure and went back recently to last kown good.
From my current LOU, I’d say there are two different possible happenings.
Either after IDing prior trough and distinguishing which of the « 2 D nodes » it is, then at 12sec PRV of the current n+1 bar exceeds prior midday’s peak (1) or it remains below (2).
If 1, then we have C>>D>>G and we enter and hold for L etc..
If 2, then we have C>>C.
I wanted to have a break, but I finally thought about something.
Ok. I’ve just had another little Aha. D node is a point at the end of a bar (cf MADA doc). I had not understood this statement completely nor concretely up to now.
Even though I have previously mentionned the little Aha I had had about the fact that D node was a point at the end of a bar, I had not realized up to now that the word « action » was uncounsciously still stuck into my mind with the D node. As we say in my language, les vieilles habitudes ont la peau dure (old habits have hard skin)…
So, if D node is a point at the end of a bar it means in my mind now that D node IS a bar, or better said some bars ARE a D node.
And D node bars are the bars that are troughs. Rephrased, D node bars, are bars bounded on the left and right by higher bars.
The way I see and sense the being of D node reminds me the retro action we, sometimes, are to perform inside a lat when Lat4 is in the shadow.
So D, according to what I just said is the name in Cycle 1 terminology for bars that are troughs, when trough means a trough in terms of form, not a merely decreasing move. Any trough is, compared to before, a decreasing one, but not all decreasing moves are troughs.
Moreover, how I see D node now clears up a bit why in some exposed-as-true paths linking A to F for instance, D was sometimes not present. It must be because it’s an implicit gate. Passing B to F implies D. Maybe D was not always put along the paths in the ExSc thread because of its implicitness aspect.
Now the thing is : when a bar is determined as being a B or C, then we wait. It’s EOB now. So next one begins. 12 seconds later, we look backwards and search for D node. I wonder : which D node ? The last one ? Or the reference one, in the sense that « the 2 in R2R/B2B ? ».
To be continued…
No. You are coming out of midday. The only path available is A->C->G using the ‘OR Before’ of D.
Cycle Trading is event based. More than one event can occur on any bar.
Also true is that A->C->G describes an event that encapsulates many bars.
I understand this very well.
Hmm.. Not sure why you're saying this. I answered that there's a possibility to have A>>C>>G if G conditions are met, and there's also a possibility to have A>>C>>C if G conditions are not met. If the second option is not possible, how could C node repeat ? I know it can repeat, and not necessarily only during midday. Maybe a rephrasement would be welcome ? I don't know.
I keep on working on Cycle 1 and started to sim trading, in order to de-center a bit from this D node and Cycle 1.