Making JH' SCT and all his material alive

WchPl said:
Maybe using your charts at my level is not a good thing to do , but here I don't understand.

View attachment 202738

On the arrow with the number 62, you located a B turn in Set D. Let's admit this.
In Modrian Table, we're in Set D at B turn and last EE was BM,rev.

The next EE is Af. Being as our last n EE was BM,rev I look in Modrian Table in the n-1 column and start from BM,rev and search for Af in the n list. It is not, so no pairing is found, so new A-turn. Our last n EE, Af, becomes the new n-1 EE.
The next EE is both BO,T1 and PP6. So I look in Modrian table in Set D in n-1 list and...there is no Af in routine cell. So no pairing is found of course but here I loose the thing.

Another thing; on the only C turn appearing on this chart snippet, we're ina Set A. Clear. The EE on this C turn has been BM,rev. The next EE is BO,T1, so I look in the Modrizan Table in n-1 list and start from BM,rev and search for a pairing with BO,T1. It's not in the list, so we advance with A-turn towards Set B. You labelled an A-turn on Set A, not on Set B.

I am used to notice this kind of things and with experience I know when I see two things contradictory but you say they are not, then I need more differenciation. But I must admit there, I would feel really better if it was a typo or if the truth is that I should not, at my level, use your charts if I want to have more clarity.
More...

Yeah, if everything else lines up, in de-briefing I would have included that C-turn in Trend Set D.
 
Even though Modrian table lists turns upper case, I think it helpful to have turns lower case and trend types Uppercase, as Jack intended :p

turns are lower case.
the four trend sets are upper case.​

I've bumped into the Modrian wall several times now as well. Hope you make it through. I suspect in order to get the correct IDs, one need exactly the same system, at very least same price suppression, volume element sequencing and fractal IDs. That may potentially involve alot of details, spread over thousands of posts, though most common rules are "known", I'm not sure we follow them, or found exact IDs ourself (better). As Sprout suggested, maybe it can be reverse engineered by using Modrian table. Also as Sprout, my "system/rules" keeps changing. For me especially alot, so true authority lies with ourselves, not outside. Very happy to see progress, and wonder if you have 3 fractals fully differentiated, or is there more to anticipation that could be helpful in that area?
 
I'm ill. Most likely did I forced too much recently. The current issue with Modrian table affected me a bit strongly.

"He's gonna pop" once again. Necessary surely.

Will recover my health and be back soon.
 
Simples said:
Even though Modrian table lists turns upper case, I think it helpful to have turns lower case and trend types Uppercase, as Jack intended :p

turns are lower case.
the four trend sets are upper case.​

I've bumped into the Modrian wall several times now as well. Hope you make it through. I suspect in order to get the correct IDs, one need exactly the same system, at very least same price suppression, volume element sequencing and fractal IDs. That may potentially involve alot of details, spread over thousands of posts, though most common rules are "known", I'm not sure we follow them, or found exact IDs ourself (better). As Sprout suggested, maybe it can be reverse engineered by using Modrian table. Also as Sprout, my "system/rules" keeps changing. For me especially alot, so true authority lies with ourselves, not outside. Very happy to see progress, and wonder if you have 3 fractals fully differentiated, or is there more to anticipation that could be helpful in that area?
More...

I like the thread snippet you posted. Thank you for that refinement.
 
WchPl said:
I'm ill. Most likely did I forced too much recently. The current issue with Modrian table affected me a bit strongly.

"He's gonna pop" once again. Necessary surely.

Will recover my health and be back soon.
More...

You are doing better than you realize, a bunch of stuff will ‘click’ for you soon.

How do I know? It’s evident in the questions that you ask and the artifacts of your work posted.

Feel better, rest up!
 
Sprout said:
Those errors dimmish in frequency as one continues the process. The chart snippet that you have posted in an un-debriefed chart. I do recommend that you do work with Jack's (& students) charts first and foremost. Even those by Jack, they do have inconsistencies from time to time and a majority (if not all) of those where one finds inconsistencies are un-debriefed charts as well. I'm come to believe that it was intentional. Most specifically for the intention of supporting building one's mind and stimulating one's own 'comparing and contrasting' deduction skills.

As some point one has to begin to trust themselves and their relationship to the market based on the work they have done building their mind from the market's basic granularity on up. There's definitely a leap required. In my own path, I've come to discover; it's the principals that create the guidance, not necessarily any artifacts left behind. The artifacts are supportive for sure but I think it's part of the screening process and where a number of folks just give up coming to a conclusion that Jack's work is gibberish and that it doesn't pan out logically.
More...

To add to the thought quoted above, if you search for SCT learning from scratch post #219, in it he does describe why there are aspects of his chart illustrations that do not match with the textual descriptions of the Market System of Operation. It was/is a limitation of the Genesis software and how it handles filters, functions, etc,.. The workaround as least with the price cases are having software performing bar coloring, which even though the visual geometry doesn't line up, can be programmed to be logically accurate.
 
I thought Elliot Wave analysis was convoluted but this is on another level. Kudos to you Gurus if you can understand this stuff. "The full offer of The Market" is enormous, if you can get it!
 
Back on the road. Definitely I should take more often some days of rest, instead of working months and months in a row whithout giving myself a rest more than one or two days sometimes, cause this leads me to burn out finally and I'm forced like recently, to take several days in a row of break.
I still don"t know which rythm would be the best for me but I think at least one day of rest a week would be a nice equilibrium. Anyway I'll make you know about it.

For today, I'll reread posts #861, #862, #864, #870, #279 of the SCT learning from scratch Journal AND I will fix the following into my mind :

Sprout said:
You are doing better than you realize, a bunch of stuff will ‘click’ for you soon.

How do I know? It’s evident in the questions that you ask and the artifacts of your work posted.
More...


So I'll retake the chart attached on post #863 and make a first attempt using both MT/MR to label correctly turns and trend types.

Then I'll post it and begin a new log.

THEN

I'll go for some exercise at the gym

AND

When back, I'll debrief the chart and the log with or whithout any comments you may have sent in-between.

I hope you have experienced a lot of good moments and profitable orders. May the full offer of the market be extracted by you today. Wish you the best ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top