Making JH' SCT and all his material alive
- Thread starter WchPl
- Start date
You are building your logic, which will support you further and further.
It's always good to revisit specs for further refinement:
- Which fractal do you use for BM, Rev and BO, T1's. FF or maybe slower ones too?
- Do you use established RTL for BO, T1's, or you sometimes use change in price case sentiment?
- PP!'s take effect once, on next bar with P1 ass.
- EE imply the event.
- First P1 ass. hides left of new trend segment.
- EE usually reverse.
- Ve may be interesting.
Last edited:
Exceptionally, I won't dispose of the same amount of time as usual, today and tomorrow for work. It's a pity, but it's ok. Any time I can find an hour or so for work I'll use it for that. Monday I'll be much more active than today and tomorrow.
Have all a nice week end and the best IR to all of you
Have all a nice week end and the best IR to all of you
Optimizing the little disponible time I have, going forward on the refinement and log.
I notices a little thing that is surely very important. It deals with assigned P1's and its BM.
If I'm clear with that, each time an assigned P1 is done, one is to place its relative BM.
The example that made surge a question in my mind happens on bar 22, 11:20am.
The prior bar (21) due to the EE located on it which was PP3, makes assign P1 on bar 22.
Therefore, on bar 22 there is to assign a new P1 and place its corresponding BM. here is the question I asked to myself : at this moment, where to place the BM ? At first, I put it at the top of the bar because of IDing an XR PC. But, after looking at the sent of the bar and thinking a bit about it, the answer may be other. Then, being as the sent is long, I put BM at the bottom.
It makes more sense to me, although I know I can be totally wrong.
On bar 8, 10:05am, the question did happen too, but as the sent of the bar and the RTL of the PC are congruent, so it was easy so to speak. If bar 8's sent had been short, I surely would have put BM on top, so a short one.
Feel free to comment this understanding, i'm not sure about what I say as it seems to me that it makes equal sense to put BM in function of the sent than in function of the form of PC. Of course, when the two are congruent, it's obvious.
I notices a little thing that is surely very important. It deals with assigned P1's and its BM.
If I'm clear with that, each time an assigned P1 is done, one is to place its relative BM.
The example that made surge a question in my mind happens on bar 22, 11:20am.
The prior bar (21) due to the EE located on it which was PP3, makes assign P1 on bar 22.
Therefore, on bar 22 there is to assign a new P1 and place its corresponding BM. here is the question I asked to myself : at this moment, where to place the BM ? At first, I put it at the top of the bar because of IDing an XR PC. But, after looking at the sent of the bar and thinking a bit about it, the answer may be other. Then, being as the sent is long, I put BM at the bottom.
It makes more sense to me, although I know I can be totally wrong.
On bar 8, 10:05am, the question did happen too, but as the sent of the bar and the RTL of the PC are congruent, so it was easy so to speak. If bar 8's sent had been short, I surely would have put BM on top, so a short one.
Feel free to comment this understanding, i'm not sure about what I say as it seems to me that it makes equal sense to put BM in function of the sent than in function of the form of PC. Of course, when the two are congruent, it's obvious.
Attachments
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
Trend segments alternate as per the pattern.
Dom -> non-Dom -> Dom -> non- Dom,... etc.
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
A trend segment is a trend on a faster fractal. On the 5m, at times, it presents itself as a single bar.
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
For bar6, bar13,etc... what is necessary for a BO,T1 EE to be true?
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
With your 2nd PP1, for that to be true what other conditions must be met?
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
Sometimes the completion of a trend segment coincides with the start of a larger trend; Dom -> Dom.
Other times it’s the continuation of the existing larger trend; Dom -> non-Dom or non-Dom -> Dom.
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
When the OOE resets, what does one do?
Trend segments alternate as per the pattern.
Dom -> non-Dom -> Dom -> non- Dom,... etc.
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
A trend segment is a trend on a faster fractal. On the 5m, at times, it presents itself as a single bar.
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
For bar6, bar13,etc... what is necessary for a BO,T1 EE to be true?
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
With your 2nd PP1, for that to be true what other conditions must be met?
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
Sometimes the completion of a trend segment coincides with the start of a larger trend; Dom -> Dom.
Other times it’s the continuation of the existing larger trend; Dom -> non-Dom or non-Dom -> Dom.
An EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
When the OOE resets, what does one do?
Last edited:
What I deduce from this is that
- as on any FS or A-Band EE the OOE resets on the current bar, and on all toher EEs (so PP!s and B/C bands) P1 is assigned on next bar.
then, each time a BMrev, a BO,T1 or any A-Band EE is located, then P1 is assigned on current bar.
This makes me I don't get what is BO,T1, and I'm glad about this as it offers me possibility to, finally, get it.
The documentation I have is there as for BO,T1 :
What I read is a BO,T1 is a break out of prior RTL whithout T1. So when you ask where is the T1, there is something, manifestly that I miss. The only thing I could say is : it was 2 bars before.
Also, I have this in mind :
And reviewing this helps me :
11:
1st case - is VE or if the sentiment changed on the third bar, an IBGS.
2nd case - the sentiment of the third bar determines if it gets a BM short at the top of the bar because it has XO the RTL. The fanning includes the form. BM's and BO,T1's do that too AND they also account for sentiment.
In the above two cases, if the 3rd bar sentiment is long then we are still in the Dominant traverse of let's say the BM short of the first bar. In practice, BM's long and short are not on the same bar. At one time scale it could look like this, but when going intrabar with the faster timescale you'll see the vertical orientation of the higher timescale bar transform into a horizontal orientation of tapes/traverses/channels that we have trained our minds to see.
12:
1st case - this one's tricky since the sentiment of the bar can be in congruent with the form or non congruent with the form. Depends on context. Context will detemine if sentiment is subject to the Form and Form takes precedence.
2nd case - this clears up the prior cases unclarity in a way. If the close of the third bar is in between the RTL and the BM long, then it is a BO,T1. BM short is placed at the high of the third bar because it's a XO of the RTL and the start of a short tape. How this relates to the larger context that is developing is determined by Dom-nonDom-Dom of the 'pattern'
3rd case - if the third bar's close is below the BM long, then it's price went through BO,T1 on it's way to BM,rev. I log both. If the close is in the zone between the RTL and the BM long, then only a BO,T1
It was when I was building the Great Matrix. The case 12 for example was this one :
The thing is that in "BO,T1" there is both BO and T1. BO is break out, T1 deals with a trough of volume.
You said here the second case provides clarity on the tricky 1st case as one is to ubicate the close of bar 3 compared to prior established RTL to determine is a BO,T1. No mention of volume so far.
That's why I don't understand the BO,T1. In the documentation, it's clearly said it's a break out of prior RTL whithout T1. So, what I understand is that no T1 must be IDied on the BO of prior RTL to say it's a BO,T1. It would then be just a BO.
Then, what is a T1 ? first trough in the OOE, it's a piece of the volume elements. What are they ? P1, T1, P2, T2P, T2F. So, a BO,T1 if I continue on the same way, can only happen on P1, P2, T2P or T2F.
There's obligatory something wrong in what I say, but here is a case where I see contradictory definitions. It's then obligatorily ME who's wrong, and who is not reading between the lines. I'll be solved anyway.
Something more : here is a hand drawn example that shows something which is directly linked to what we're talking about and that embodies sometheing that made me have hard times :
Bar 1 : long sent
Bar 2 : XB, sent is congruent with the form : RTL is established.
BAR 3 : XB, sent is congruent with the form. Accordingly to "this clears up the prior cases unclarity in a way. If the close of the third bar is in between the RTL and the BM long, then it is a BO,T1", there is no BO,T1 being as bar 3's close is inside the prior established rtl (prolonged in dash line)
The difficulty begins now. The prior rtl is fanned. So we have two new rtls : the one established by the second XB AND the one established by the fanning.
Bar 4 : XB, sent is not congruent with the form and close here is :
-inside the rtl that the prior PC established, so the most recent so comapred to this rtl there is BO, T1
- outside the fanned rtl.
So here, is there BO,T1 ? if yes, from only one rtl : the fanned one built up from the two forst XB's. But compared to the prior price cases's one, no.
So the thing I wonder is : which RTL takes precedence ?
Manifestly, I use prior PC's rtl everytime to locate BO,T1 regardless of what volume does. And I'm forgetting to focus on the close to see a BO. I was only watching if the n PC crosses n-1 PC's rtl.
Anyway, we are here still not talking about volume, whereas BO,T1 deals with a T1 in volume. So, even though this example was solved, it would not make clarity as for the "T1" part of the "BO,T1" concept, if not you would not have asked :
Finally :
Either the answer is in the litterature and I've not fixed it, or it is not and is to be deduced and then :
a PP1 is the accelerating P1. I must remind I've posted about it very recently, exposing what makes me feel a bit uncomfortable about it. Nevertheless, I decided to go with " if you wanna get a PP1 you must see three P1s in a row nos separated by a WAIT event AND the third P1 must be more higher compared to second P1 than second P1 was higher than the first P1."
So, starting from this, if I have :
first P1 : 10K
second P1 : 15k (15-10 = 5)
third P1 : 25K -> PP1, so P1 is assigned on next bar (25-15 = 10)
next bar : P1 assigned, and volume is at 40K (40-25=15)
So here I see again another PP1, in the same vein of what I saw between the first three P1's.
If there is more conditions to be met for that to be true, then I need to reread some things, and I would be grateful if you could help me with IDing what to read in order to solve this.
After reasoning and thinking strong about all this, reviewing the EEs literature and the Volume Test Procedure Element Ranges sheet, I come to this, and it makes a lot of sense when I see the chart.
Unfortunately, I can't produce work anymore for today, my disponible time has expired. Thank you very much for your time, help, patience and devotion, best day to you, and see you tomorrow.
Unfortunately, I can't produce work anymore for today, my disponible time has expired. Thank you very much for your time, help, patience and devotion, best day to you, and see you tomorrow.
PP1 has "Internal Kills" = ?
Texts say something about PP1 being "3 of a kind". Not entirely sure what that means though, but could be 3 P1's.
It's interesting to see what others see. The difference in what they think they see and what's actually there. This is the case with most of Jack's writings and why it's so important to read to assimilate and integrate single elements at a time vs plowing through a thread.
The text says:
If possible draw RTL with Sentiment
Signal: BO* of RTL w/ T1*
For what you say to be true in your above writings then the text would say:
If possible draw RTL with Sentiment
Signal: BO* of RTL wo/ T1*
*on ANY BAR
As for PP1,
If three P1's with acceleration then PP1 = True.
If three P1's without acceleration then PP1 = False or in other words, Not PP1. Not PP1 is not an EE.
If PP1 = true then P1 assigned on next bar with the opposite BM.
If an EE is signaling that the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning. The OOE resets.
Last edited: