I'll do so. Thanks a lot
I apologize that I did not make a single post combining the two prior ones plus this one.
Making JH' SCT and all his material alive
- Thread starter WchPl
- Start date
I apologize that I did not make a single post combining the two prior ones plus this one.
Yes, FS’s take precedence.
Lat6 is also the start of another lateral.
When there are multiple laterals intertwined with each other it’s a sign of multiple fractals on different timescales converging into a standing wave node. It takes the form of sublaterals completely within the shadow of the larger lateral. Other times there is a ‘stair stepping’ of laterals, sometimes all ending on a single bar and other times ending sequentially.
The above makes more sense when you zoom out into larger timescales what’s happening.
Check lat8, it continues until the OB BO bar.
Currently doing this, and debriefing my 03/29/19 Chart. The simple fact to degap previous day's close and next day's open already provides some cascading effect.
Then, I cant' find back the post in question, but I had read something close to "when debriefing is where the most money is made". Sort of.
What I'm currently doing is the total demonstration of that quotation. If I could find the post I'm referring to, I'd jump on the like button below it ^^
Hope all of you are having a nice day and enjoy your week end
The first I put has been :
1 - When a Lat appears so we're on its bar 3, if the price case built by bar 2 and 3 of this Lat permits to measure volume, is one to do so ?
- I just deduced the answer from this :
2- When there's a BO,T1 on a non-permitting to measure volume price case, does BO,T1 take precedence ?
For now, I'd say yes and as I can't find yet the answer deductively I'll stick to this and see what happens.
3 - When an OB appears, as an OB is per definition showing two opposite trends at the same time, we can build two FFFs, two tapes so to speak. Until now, I've been working using the low/high of prior bar connected to the open of the 2nd bar creating OB, to build the two tapes : one short and one long.
So, we can say the trendline crosses the OB.
On the following illustration, on bar 7 and 8 we have an OB.
What I've been used to see here is the accelerating dark blue tape, crossing then the OB. I notice now, that when I annotated this chart, at this moment of the chart, I did not do it, and fanned the prior rtl until encapsulating the OB's low. This led me to include in the rtl the next two FTPs and "only" (understand lately) see the BO,T1 on Lat 4...WHEREAS, if I use the usual way I've been training with, to accelerate the rtl by make it cross the OB, I see the BO,T1 earlier than I did. And on Lat 2 I'd already have a short BM.
As I know, the market provides any answer to any question. We have just to read. So, let's read with the "use the crossing of OB if it appears and if it's possible*" and see what the market provides me as an answer.
* it will not be possible to do so un function of the numer of legs of the n-1 bar beginning the OB.
Not certain which bars you are referring to as bar 7 and bar 8.
In general;
OB's that present as a T1 on the top row of the log are the exception to the PP! class of EE's. As such they do not anticipate market turns as per the PP! rule set.
However the thinking behind what you did does in some situations present as true as it applies to TL geometry applied bar-by-bar and as one's spectrum of differentiation grows.
There is no PP1 in this sequence even though you have ID'd one. It could have been the Af, but that would require the 2nd T1 of this sequence to be a P1. For the 2nd T1 to be a P1, then lat4 would have to be a P1 long. Since it was not, the Af stands.
This is how retro as a background process functions as a habit. As one progresses in bar ID's there a constant flow of checking and includes prior bars. Retro does at times get triggered. Some times it has another ID that takes precedence. Other times it is the dominant ID from the process that is formally triggered and written in the log.
Yes. In this example if the 1st bar was a P1. One then sees the path that retro leads one to deduce the T1 as a prereq for the BO,T1.
This highlights the power of the price cases and the 5x5 grid deconstructing the basic granularity of market data and how that builds a logical framework.
Finally, clearly expressed it is : on its technical BO, is a LAT still active and then can one see an Aa HVBO on the confirmation BO bar ?
On the last bar of the chart, I had to think if it's an Aa HVBO : a LAT is built, there's an internal along, and an HVBO surges. BUT, logically on the confirmation BO of a LAT, one can't find any Aa HVBO being as the LAT is not active anymore.
So, I see on the rightmost bar, a rev chron as it's a second P2 and it's above P1.
The possibility for what I just said to be wrong, is if I understood bad the "one uses rev chron when there's a second P2 > P1".
This can either mean "TWO P2 being above P1 and on the second one then one uses rev chron and puts P1 on the second P2 being > P1
OR one P2 being wherever and then comes a second P2 that is > P1.
There must be a detail that would clear this up, and as I don't see it for the now, I put this in my list of questions.