Making JH' SCT and all his material alive

[stepan7]

It is

You need volume on FDAX. Find out is it volume you have on FDAX or on bets. If volume on bets no use.
You can use channel part of JHM on spreads and disregard volume.

 

[fordewind]

Here is a bit coarse view, doing MADA and trying to nest the three levels of fractals.
I'll soon actively post examples of my problems, post logs, and provide a nice amount of work through charts, logs, messages.

In this chart attached, I quickly focused only on nesting fractals, which is never a good thing from what I know for sure..this is why the "bit coarse view". Some annotations are skipped sometimes. This is a prelude, not a finished nor diligent work. Just wanted to keep on posting some MADA routine and exercises.

Keep nesting, but once you get hit on the chin, i mean...sigh.....I`d love to see you nesting real time and real money on some huge event(which will eventually happen).

 

[WchPl]

There's a couple of things. First, Jack used the ES to teach this method. The instrument that you are attempting to chart doesn't have the same kind of liquidity that the ES does. Your specific application might not work due to this liquidity issue. It appears as if most of your volume bars are under 1k in transactions. In comparison, on the ES, whenever volume dips below 2.5k, practitioners of this method are sidelined.
I don't have much knowledge on other applicable markets as for my focus is the ES.

This is something new for me. Thank you for advising. I feel like I've some weaknesses as for which market to monitor, which instrument precisely to use etc.. I only focused on the method itself. On the data I have available and for which I pay for each month, I only have a serie of markets. Can you please give me the code of your ES market please so I can try to open it on tradingview ?

Also, RTH is defined for your market. You should be doing MADA just on this segment and not on the extended hours. Although it is a continuous market, the character is different enough between the two to explicitly account for this. Annotate a vertical line for your start and end times.

Thank you to remind me that, I always forgot it.

In your first chart, fbo's on always on the RTL. They come after a pt3 has been established. The first black fbo is not an fbo. It cannot be, it's on the LTL of the short channel and a pt1 of the beginning black channel long. This pt1 is an ve and ftt of bar9. This is an early ID of an ftt, bar10 could also be considered the ftt if it was missed on the prior bar.

Match your channel colors to the OOE colors. The dark blue channel's pt2 is not an blue ftt. The blue ftt would come after a blue pt3.

This is tipically the kind of error I'm ashamed of. The worst is that I KNOW what you said. Overwhelmed, not getting to combine everything at every time...thank you for helping me with that.

If appears that you are fanning from pt3's of a channel. Spydertrader does this. Jack fans from pt1. Both can work, but I've found that Jack's way worked better for me. Once understanding the principals, one can apply how they see fit, which is what Spydertrader imho did.
The accelerated tapes look ok. When there is an accelerated tape, that is the Dominant Traverse. Acceleration always denotes Dominance.

I have no preference and the fact that I fan from point 3 is not something natural, it is something I aquired along the time, and it's a habit a I have now cause when I began I used to watch Jack's chart where he effectively fanned from point 1. This was my first way of doing it to. Then I moved to Spyder's threads and changed my habit to fanning from poit 3.
Exactly the same happened with the labelling of pt1 and pt2 : at the beginning, like Jack did, I had always pt1 and pt2 on the same RTL, pt3 were to be on the LFT. Spyder does not do that.
I was then, first doing like Jack, then like Spyder.
If you see any benefit, I'll take my old habits back

With your row of volume annotations, add another row atop that uses this first base layer as the input to determine incr/decr volume. You'll use this upper row to screen for the larger peaks and troughs that occur by looking at bar clusters. Then add another row atop that.
The idea is that tracking bar-by-bar with give you the gaussians for the tapes.

Gonna do so.

 

[WchPl]

As I'm making a list of numbered questions to be diligent, here it is :


Question 1 : Nesting fractals properly

Question 2 : The Gaussian formations

Question 3 : Bands

Question 4 : Failsafes

Waiting for more



Question 1 : Nesting fractals properly


Currently I'm working as I'm reading that Thread.


Some questions surge. I know for sure, that to draw any FF, TF or SF, it both deals with the price bars pattern AND with the volume action. Here begin the problems to me.


Let's take any XB. Two black bars. They are followed by an XR, red sentiment. So three bars. On the lowest low of those three bars, which is the low of bar 1, we see a Point 1, at the highest high (which is the high of bar 2) we see a Point 2 and on the low of bar 3 we see a Point 3. So on this kind of pattern, a long channel appears clearly. At THIS level of resolution, so TWO TAPES, we can see, geometrically a Long channel going on. The close and the high of bar 3 would say if the last point to annotate was either FTT, FBO or VE.
But, what must volume do to declare « here is a FF/TF/SF ?

I’m still reading the nested fractals thread and still do no see any rule set to decide.

I post a document used and commented by JH. I just don’t see any reason why bars 10-11-12 are a Fast Fractal. In addition to the fact there’s a color error as for volume bars, I don’t understand the rule, not because it is to hard to understand the explanation, but simply because I do not find any explanation.

Any help while I’m reading the thread would be highly appreciated.



Question 2 : The Gaussian formations


I suspect this to be solved or helped by Sprout’s last advices as for new rows on the volume pane.

 

[WchPl]

Keep nesting, but once you get hit on the chin, i mean...sigh.....I`d love to see you nesting real time and real money on some huge event(which will eventually happen).

You seem to think I nest fractals.

I do not. Simply because I do not know how to nest. I am on the nested fractals thread currently, I just stopped right before writing this post, on Page 18 (reading english, even though I do it faster than before, is still a strong effort for me).
In 18 pages, I have not found ANY explanation about how to nest the fractals. I hope to find some one day, in any page of that thread.
So far, that thread has not helped me in any way.

Therefore, your comment is quite rare to me as I do not know if I'm lucky and nested properly the fractals on my last chart, or if it's you who believe I know how to do it.
Anyway, believe me, if something has been done nicely by me as for nesting fractals, this comes out of nowhere and is really not reliable.

I just know that I do not know.

 

[WchPl]

I am now on page 20 of the thread.

Jack makes a summarize and suddenly says :

3. Annotating price on the fast fractal was done and slowly some omissions were picked up upon. The vocabulary got refined and translation finally appeared to describe the progress of price.

I do not see any explanation in any of the 20 prior pages, of how to annotate the fractals. Please, can anyone help me with that ?

The scariest to me is that I see people who were asking about it...and no answer ever come. Until page 20 at least.

 

[WchPl]

Here I join this doc posted by JH.

We can see he draws a long fast fractal on three bars, with volume decreasing from pt1 to pt2 and doing trough on pt2, and increasing from pt2 to pt3.
So, the opposite of what has always been said.


And here is the explanation :

the short and long do not make a short trading fractal since the long ends too high. We throw the short aside and consider the next two (long and short. We see that the short ftt is above the first ftt, so a trading fractal is possible.

When the pink RTL is runn ftt to ftt, there is a geomtric interference and so se fan to have a geometric solution.

As a trader we could just be trading ftt to ftt and getting the job done. As we past the last ftt we went long.

The forming bar finally finishes as it went through a bunch of mutations. There were MADA laps or cycles as well and a lot of logging.

We can reverse on the post stitch BLK >>>OP top because we are doing a ve and we will or will not be in the "zone" after that.

If zone, then M1 ftt is next trade, If not zone then we are r2r in a fast Fractal. after ftt on beginning of upcoming bar.

Now we have advanced to a TWO fractal level of building. we have fast fractals and trading fractals.

Any help would be appreciated, cause the explanation is not a concept applicable to any context, but an result of an example that is not helpful to me. At all.
I already presented kind of a context, decided to draw a fast fractal on the same situation, but I know from sure and reliable source, that it was not correct.
Why ? I only know that "it depends on what volume is doing".

I'm still searching for a simple explanation of what volume must do WHILE price is making the pattern, to be allowed to see any fractal.

 

[tiddlywinks]

Hi.

I put off posting to your thread until you posted some specific problems and questions. This also revealed your level of knowledge of JHPV methodology, which makes my response(s) more appropriate, I think.

Firstly, since you feel nesting is your most immediate problem I've attached a file that will help. For lurking JHPV elders, it is not a new file, you likely have it.

With that out of the way...

Exactly the same happened with the labelling of pt1 and pt2 : at the beginning, like Jack did, I had always pt1 and pt2 on the same RTL, pt3 were to be on the LFT. Spyder does not do that.

THIS IS WRONG!! pt1 & pt3 form the RTL. pt2 is the LTL. File attached.

Let's take any XB. Two black bars. They are followed by an XR, red sentiment. So three bars. On the lowest low of those three bars, which is the low of bar 1, we see a Point 1, at the highest high (which is the high of bar 2) we see a Point 2 and on the low of bar 3 we see a Point 3. So on this kind of pattern, a long channel appears clearly. At THIS level of resolution, so TWO TAPES, we can see, geometrically a Long channel going on. The close and the high of bar 3 would say if the last point to annotate was either FTT, FBO or VE.
But, what must volume do to declare « here is a FF/TF/SF ?

1) Example IS NOT two tapes.
2a) FTT... What does volume do to indicate dominance? What does FTT stand for? Which TL?
b)FBO... What does volume do to indicate non-dominance? What does volume do in order form a new container? What does FBO stand for? Which TL?
c)VE... What does volume do to indicate dominance? Which TL? What does VE stand for?

Question 1 : Nesting fractals properly

Question 2 : The Gaussian formations

Question 3 : Bands

Question 4 : Failsafes

IMO, your order is backwards. Should be, IMO...
1) Failsafe
2-3) Nesting... Visual geometric(only) annotation 1 fractal level at a time
2-3) Gaussians... 1 fractal level at a time
4) Bands

Learning JHPV in a hierarchical way is sometimes a key to picking up on things and getting to a-ha moments. Like nesting, the pieces of JHPV fit together. It also helps determine which pieces fit into your existing trading style and technique out of the gate, and which pieces may not even be worthwhile for addition to an existing proven method or strategy. I have no idea which ways of learning work for you, but with JHPV I recommend a hierarchical structure.

HTH

 

[stepan7]

Here I join this doc posted by JH.

We can see he draws a long fast fractal on three bars, with volume decreasing from pt1 to pt2 and doing trough on pt2, and increasing from pt2 to pt3.
So, the opposite of what has always been said.


And here is the explanation :



Any help would be appreciated, cause the explanation is not a concept applicable to any context, but an result of an example that is not helpful to me. At all.
I already presented kind of a context, decided to draw a fast fractal on the same situation, but I know from sure and reliable source, that it was not correct.
Why ? I only know that "it depends on what volume is doing".

I'm still searching for a simple explanation of what volume must do WHILE price is making the pattern, to be allowed to see any fractal.

Here is your FDAX. Time is EST. Channels and Gaussians are keys in the JHM. There are easy rules to draw Channels. Now you can draw matching Gaussians. And from MADA process only DA part left to do.

 

[llIHeroic]

Good luck with your studies WchPl. If I could give myself advice a few years back I would emphasize a few tenets Spyder always said over and over... all you really need is your brain and the market, also, make FULLY ANNOTATED CHARTS. The rest kind of solves itself.

Of course I don't know how I would've ever truly understood the importance of that advice without being a good bit of the ways down the path and having the benefit of hindsight. Maybe a better piece of advice is just hang in there whatever way you're able to make yourself do so.. be prepared to keep working and studying despite long plateaus in your understanding.. they will come, no doubt about that. And no amount of demonstration or explanation by someone else will solve those tundras for you until your own brain has the AHA.