Making JH' SCT and all his material alive

Let's talk about Volume, sticking up to FORMS.


What can Volume do, like price, with two consecutive bars ?

From any given volume bar that has its level and color (that is referred to the corresponding price bar's ubication of close compared to open), the next Volume bar can either :


-> be above the prior one

-> be the same as prior one

-> be below the prior one


That leads us to the second part, the Volume cases Matrix.

Volume cases.jpg


Let's say and fix that :


-> if next volume bar (the 2nd one) is above the prior one then Volume is increasing so Volume case will be here : UP = U


-> if next volume bar is equal to the prior one then Volume is stagnating so Volume case will be here : EQUAL = E


-> if next volume bar is below the prior one then Volume is decreasing so Volume case will be here : DOWN = D



So when volume increases between 2 colums in a row we get U case.

When volume stagnates between 2 columns in a row we get E case.

And if volume decreases between 2 columns in a row we get D case.



So, being as there are 3 possible evolutions between 2 columns, there are 9 possible evolutions of 3 columns in a row.


And then we get to


-> From Inc to Inc = UU

-> From Inc to Equal = UE

-> From Inc to Dec = UD

-> From Dec to Dec = DD

-> From Dec to Equal = DE

-> From Dec to Inc = DU

-> From Equal to Equal = EE

-> From Equal to Inc = EU

-> From Equal to Dec = ED





Therefore we get 10 Price Cases : XB, XR, SYM, OB, FTP, FBP, StB, StR, Hitch, LAT

and we get 3 Volume Cases : U, E, D that expand in 9 Volume cases.




What is next ?


-> The next is from any Price Case appearing on any Volume Case appearing, we either get a defined/conflictuous/absent trend(s).


From this defined/conflictuous/absent trend(s), what is coming next ? Another price bar with its volume colum, creating another Price case on a new defined Volume case.


That leads to the next question -> is that new bar to be included or excluded from the previous established defined/conflictuous/absent trend ?



Next step is then to build a Matrix linking every Price case with each other ( so 10*10 =100 cases). These are all the different permutations of price cases one after another.


100 PC Matrix.jpg


That is the first part of the let's say Great Matrix :)


At any sequence of two price cases formed then by 3 price bars, we always have either a confirmation/invalidation/no answer of the prior established defined/conflictuous/absent trend.


To get this a bit more dynamic, we need to add volume, so all the 9 possible evolutions of volume on 3 columns in a row.


In other words, we're to affect UU, UE, UD, EE, EU, ED, DD, DE and DU volume cases, to all of the 100 cases of the prior Matrix going from 11 to 1010.
 
So we get clearly our 100 price cases combinations, we affected the 9 volume combinations that can surge. Let’s have a deeper look at what I just said concerning volume cases.


To get clearer with volume cases, I had no other option to build the finite Volume cases Matrix.


That’s how it goes.


From any Volum bar, the next one can either be U, E or D. (I’ll explain later why the circles on that image).


From 1 volume bar to 3 cases.jpg



I used a color code that reminds price bars’. I notice now it was not the best choice to avoid confusion, but I think for now it’s ok.


The U, E and D volume cases can appear on any of the 10 price cases. When a 3rd price bar appears and creates a new price case, then its volume bar comes out with it.

So we get the 3*3 = 9 cases Volume matrix wich follows.


from 3 to 9 Volume cases.jpg


Then, when a LAT appears so in 110, 210, 310, 410, 510, 610, 710, 810, 910 and 1010 cases, we logically need a 4th volume bar beeing as a LAT is made up of 3 bars. Then this took me to build the 9 *3 = 27 cases Volume matrix that follows.


From 9 to 27 Volume cases.jpg


And here is the Matrix of the « from 110 to 910 » Price cases.

1.jpg

2.jpg

3.jpg

4.jpg

5.jpg



And what if we get two LAT in a row ? We need a 5th bar.

It took me to the 27*3= 81 cases Volume Matrix that follows.


Finite Matrix Vol 1.jpg


Finite Matrix Vol 2.jpg
 
Let’s go back to the « defined/conflictuous/absent » trend established by some Price cases.


In terms of form, what does

- An XB say ? -> we have a LONG trend

- An XR say ? -> we have a SHORT trend

- A SYM say ? -> we have two trends in CONFLICT, a short and a long

- An OB say ? -> we have two trends in CONFLICT, a short and a long

- An FTP say ? -> we have a LONG trend by the lows, and a neutral info from the highs.

- A FBP say ? -> we have a SHORT trend by the highs and neutral info from the lows.

- A StB say ? -> we have NO TREND

- A StR say ? -> we have NO TREND

- A Hitch say ? -> we have NO TREND

- A LAT say ? -> we have NO TREND ….. BUT… and we’ll see that later in the post.




So on XB and XR we have a purely unique defined trend.


On SYM and OB, trends are in conflict.


On FTP and FBP, we have a partly-defined trend by highs/lows. When the lows (on FTP) define a long trend, the highs do not confirm this, nor invalidate it. Then I said neutral info. Neither confirmation, nor invalidation. The same happens on the opoosite form of FBP.

I guess for now, as for form, a non-invalidation even though it isn’t a pure confirmation, must lead to a confirmation being as it is absolutely sure that it is purely not an invalidation.


And on the last StB, StR, Hitch and Lat, we’re unable to define any trend. The trend is absent.




Now, let’s go one more time a bit deeper in the Price cases forms. When I was doing my 100*9 = 900’s Matrix, I wanted to get some nuances on the length of bars’ legs. And this led me to notice that in function of the length of each bars’ legs, some combinations of two Price cases in a row could lead to something perfectly clear and satisfying at some times, or to some really messy things in other moments.

Then I started to study each and every of the 100 possible combinations of two consecutive price cases in a row, adding nuances to the length of bars’ legs.


From this, resulted then the finite universe of possible nuances of price cases’ forms. And here is that Matrix.


Finite Matrix 1.jpg

Finite Matrix 2.jpg




As I can see, some of the 100 combos have, in terms of form and let’s remember it, 1 unique possible surge, others have 3, and the rest have 9. As we are here talking about form exclusively, it avoid to consider any other parameter, by definition.


I come now to perceive that the number of possibilities of that unique parameter is finite. And the number of parameters is also finite. The finite universe of all the parameters with their own finite universe of possibilities creates the CONTEXT. Which is what is necessary to « catch » if one wants to always be on the right side of the market, and be in a win a little / win a lot mindset.



That last reflexion I just gave as for forms, the length of legs and the finite universe of possibilities became really crucial, and radically decisive in the study I’m making right now a summary of.


And this took me to feel I needed to go deeper into what causes problems in terms of forms, legs, trends in conflict etc.



First, I watched at a SYM. What is a SYM ? A price case describing two opposite trends by nature. One is short, the other one is long. What a basic mind would like to know is « wich of the two is actually beating the other one, so which wins ? ». In terms of form, we do not have answer at this level of parameter consideration. So I told to myself is there any possibility to see beyond and deeper inside the form of the SYM that could help me in a way ?

This is maybe unuseful, but when I was studying all this it came necessary for me to see it this way.

What’s inside a SYM ? What are the two price cases that can create a SYM ?

This came :

Inside SYM.jpg



The same came for OB, as follows

Inside OB.jpg


And finally, the same happened on Laterals. What are the possible combos that can make appear a LAT in terms, still, of form ?

And this came :

Inside a LAT.jpg




I will take now an example to show where all this is leading me right now


If a take the Finite Universe of Possible Nuances of Price Cases’ Forms, and watch at case 11.


11 is XB/XB, two purely defined trends, a long one. No more question as for form.


If I take now case 12, then we enter into the territory of « it depends ». What does it depend on ? what does anything depend on ? -> the context. What is the context ? -> the state of being = ubication = where we are in the finite universe of all parameters with all their own finite universe of possibilities.

So here, on the case 12, the first nuance makes exclude Bar 3 from the prior established RTL between Bar 1 and Bar 2. BUT, this is if I consider Bar 2 and 3 compared to Bar 1 and Bar 2. Now, what if I consider the three bars together relative to themselves ? -> I can then include the 3 bar and just fan the established RTL by bar 1 and 2 (leading later to fractals levels ? …. J ). I remind to myself that i’m still ignoring volume.

If I take the second nuance, where the low of bar 3 is the same as Bar 1’s, the same happen again.

And if I take the third nuance, then now neither comparing Bars 2 and 3 to Bar 1 and 2 nor considering the three bars together, could I decide about anything. I just know the second short trend is excluded from the prior long one, but what about the three bars ? -> it depends. What does it depend on ? -> on WCB surely….


I see now any of those possible nuances this way. So to decide about form, I understand now all the matter is to watch :


- If one is in a long trend, then what does the 3rd bar do compared to the first one….in terms of low.

- If one is in a short trend, then what does the 3rd bar do compared to the first one… in terms of high.


BM’s !!!!!


Then, to decide, will come into view Volume of course with the Matrix’s I built (the 3, 9, 27 and 81 cases’s ones), the sentiment of bars, the position of open and close compared to prior ones and established RTL, wich in the whole will create the three levels of fractals.

…..Iterative refinement ? J



I’m gonna do your exercise Sprout, and what a feeling to come by myself to something you told me to do !




Now, with all that said, I will gather everything, organize it in my mind and build WMCN from all this , and if necessary, refine what is not perfect in what I wrote in this serie of messages ;)



Take all care of you and have a nice day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top