Making JH' SCT and all his material alive
- Thread starter WchPl
- Start date
Yes, but not in this case with someone's notes. This is where deduction must be used. As you see in their writing there is no 'o', nor a space between '/' and 'T1'. To write w/o /T1 is different than w/o T1 is different than w/ T1. The expressions w/T1 and w/ T1 are essentially the same, even though in a software language they could be functionally different.
Explore 'w/T1' taken as a whole using 'with' and how that would change your interpretation and whether it would create more clarity or not. This is a nuance with english that would be frustrating for someone where it is not their first language.
Last edited:
To continue with this chart snippet;
If bar5 closed above the RTL of the price cases, it would have been a BO,T1 and the start of a new Dom trend segment. Since it did not, then by definition the XB long price case became a non-Dom trend segment and the previous larger fractal established trend did in fact continue the OOE as you have labeled. If it had closed above the price case FF RTL, then you know what it would be.
This is a shell layer of understanding. There are other distinctions to apply, but for now this is an essential concept to assimilate and use as a reference for an expanded operating point.
To understand the next piece we have to jump over the lateral for a sec. The second P2 as you have labeled is in fact an EE. Which one is it?
As a separate and distinct concept, let's say one missed the prior bar's EE and continued with Bar7 as you have ID'd as an Ab. If this is a new EE, which direction must the BM be since the prior one was short?
And high of bar 5 would be its point 1, wouldn't it ?
A little thought : you say "if bar 5 closed above the RTL of the price cases", but which PCs precisely are you pointing out ? All the prior ones beginning from Bar 1 ? So SYM, XR and XR ?
This would lead to know which precise RTL you're using to see a BO,T1.
In addition to that :
So, with the clarification you mentionned, and thanks a lot for that !, BO,T1 is BO of prior rtl WITH T1. T1 is decreasing volume, isn't it ?
Previoulsy I had labeled bar 5 as a BO,T1 and you asked : if that is true, where is the T1 ?
I realized with your clarification as for w/ = WITH, that being as volume bar 5 is increasing, bar 5 cannot be a BO,T1.
When I was doing my great matrix, you explained that on a 12 (XB/XR) case, so this is valid too for 21 case (XR/XB) which is the case we're facing here between bars 3-4-5, the close of the third bar can either close between prior established BM and RTL and this would be a BO,T1 only. A t this time once again, there was no mention of volume.
Now back to the chart I'm on : on bar 5 you say if its close had been above the prior RTL of price cases, it would have been a BO,T1.
So what confuses me is : when do you consider volume and need a T1 on the BO to declare there is a BO,T1, and when don't you ?
I see an increasing volume on bar 5, so P2 being as the volume OOE continued on bar 5 towards P2.
I see here something I need to clarify cause I feel there are two oppposite things contradicting themselves. There may be an other distinction to add in order to differentiate, and I don't see it.
using this :
, then I'd see the second P2 as an assigned P1 due to Ag VEBO EE.
From what I have in mind and notes, a FF is made up of at least two opposite tapes.
Globally, from bar 1 to bar 4, I see a unique short extended tape. So FF cannot have appeared.
The ony way I could see opposite tapes is if considering the two opposite tapes we have at the beginning, because of the SYM. BUT, this would make no sense here as I would then have to consider the first move (so M1) of the short FF you mention, as a long one. On a short container, whichever it is, M1 is short, M2 is long, M3 is short. BUT, this maybe echoes to what you said about assigned P1 hides the left side of the trend.
Important -> while writing this post, I notice you have edited some of your last posts. I guess it's important for me to read the added parts. I'll read it right now and post some DDs just after if something clear surges from that reading.
Long, at the bottom of bar 7.
And combined with was said before, then I would see this, but i'm not sure about the Ag VEBO EE on bar 6
This is a gold mine. I need to read, reread and read it again.
Thank you very much @Simples , you're pointing out some really important things.
"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?"
First DD ->
IF bar 6, 13, whichever, is a BO,T1, being as BO,T1 is an EE
AND being as EE is signaling the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning
AND when one resets the volume OOE one assign P1 on current bar if the EE is FS/A-Band EE OR on the next bar if any other EE is ID'd
THEN what is necessary for a BO,T1 to be true is : the trend segment must have been completed and is over.
For bar6, bar13,etc... what is necessary for a BO,T1 EE to be true?"
First DD ->
IF bar 6, 13, whichever, is a BO,T1, being as BO,T1 is an EE
AND being as EE is signaling the current trend segment is complete and a new one is beginning
AND when one resets the volume OOE one assign P1 on current bar if the EE is FS/A-Band EE OR on the next bar if any other EE is ID'd
THEN what is necessary for a BO,T1 to be true is : the trend segment must have been completed and is over.
This is false if I consider bar 5 being Ag VEBO. Ag VEBO is an A-band end effect, so P1 is assigned on current bar so on bar 6, not 7.