Something that you are doing is putting more emphasis on price annotations a-la SCT when RDBMS is much more oriented to the sequence of volume measurements. RDBMS uses price as a tool for suppression or measurement of volume, if you are expecting to see tapes built like SCT to give insight into RDBMS, it would be easier to think of it more like an overlay of different complimentary methods. Price formations do not define the trends, volume sequences do.
Thank you very much for this, it's providing me a first step towards some clarification.
----------------
Another thing is that in your examples you are not including the open. The doji is an important aspect of this work, it's the constant indicator of current and developing sentiment. It always matters for it reveals the dominant leg of the bar even though the price case form indicates continuation or change.
On the precise example you're referring to, I did not put the opens simply because it's deductible from the prior bar's close, the current close ubication and the color of the bar. Anyway, I'll take this into account and will be posting from now examples including open.
You second sentence is giving me some more clarification again.
-------------------
Something you can add to your charts is the 30m doji. This is similar to the BM but it is blue in color, starts at the open of the 30m and spans the 6 5m bars that a 30m bar includes. This will give one an idea of sentiment unfolding during the 5m as it relates to the 30m fractal.
Ok, thank you for that new input as for the Doji of 30mn.
BUT
The second sentence lets me perplex. In the past, you (and I've read it from JH too) stated the Timeframe and the levels of fractal are different differenciations. Here you seem to be talking about the "30min fractal". Not sure what you're precisely talking about.
-------------------------
With that said;
Bar2 - 1st tape
Bar3 - 2nd tape, acc with ftt
Bar4 - 3rd tape, fan with ftt, with form
Depending on what volume is doing with give you more clarity of BO,T1 or not.
So, that's how I see what you say
---------------
The "more info" way is the correct way on how drawing is done. A VE always expands the LTL. In this example you have not drawn an expanded channel LTL.
So, that's how I see it :
-------------
FFF is in the context of drawing the Fastest Fractal First. In bar-by-bar analysis sometimes Moves are contained within a single bar.
Trends can end in three ways:
1) By being incomplete and ending sooner than 3 moves.
2) By following a three move 'pattern'. Dom -> nonDom -> Dom ending at ftt.
3) By going into 'drift' where an odd number of moves extends 2)
That is clear
---------------
EE's with the exception of 2 are volume measurements. This is worth repeating, sometimes Moves can occur on and/or within a single bar. I know that in terms of your differentiation, drawing rtl of tapes is what you have been practicing. If you remember the context by which you started this was to start at the market's basic granularity. Think of it more as a drill than as THE WAY. As you progress, there will be times where a rtl cannot be drawn geometrically. As you progress you'll naturally come to a place where it makes sense why and where this occurs and when it does not. The key to this is exploring laterals on a deeper level and the function of "squishing".
From all I understand, I'd say to be more precise that EE's with the exception of 2 are
strictly volume measurements. BM is strictly price measurement, BO,T1 is both price and volume meausrement, and in the 33s remaining some merge some volume and price conditions, while other ones only focus on volume measurement.
I get you for the "drill rather than THE WAY".
As for squishing function : I'm happy you're bringing this on the table. I've read a lot about it but unfortunately I've not taken notes enough to make a condensed synthesis so that I could have clearly in mind what this means. As far as I remember, understand and know this function, here is how I see it : two PCs regardless of what the volume is doing, allow to measure volume. The 8 remaining can either also allow to do it, or not, depending on what volume is doing, AND there's also the case of a LAT in which from Lat4 we start (from either Lat2 or Lat4 depending of the H/L of Lat4) to measure volume regardless of the PC that is at hand.
The only thing I remember and understand as for squishing function is simply kind of merging any internals (there are 8) into one bar, conserving first O and second C at their position, and then begin to see new PCs in function of what comes next.
I'll start to do that as a baseline and will further refine it step by step using your next comments on this and my understanding based on more notes taken on what i'm reading nowadays.
Here is an example of how I'd see it for now :
I'll read this :
edit: Squishing, retro and arrows for Use Larger are referenced in post 173, 203, 389, 419, 423, 615, 616, 624,...
--------------
RDBMS is a complete system and it is volume oriented.
Doing MADA and logging the VTP with turns and trends is the most important thing right now. With your current distinctions, there will be a lot of FS's logged. The intent is to get you to engage in the process. When it becomes second nature to log all the columns in the log, then in iterative refinement, you can see how to refine and back off ID'ing so many FS's to include how to make them longer volume sequences. To do so now becomes overwhelming and leads to paralysis. This is also why documenting your "operating points" are important. By logging via a variety of "operating points" one begins to create a flexibility of thinking. As long as one is consistent with exploring any particular "operating point", the process will subconsciously lead one to ask questions that will support in gaining greater insight and clarity and other "operating points" to explore.
Thank you for this help.
-------------
Attempt on DD as for "EE", "Not EE", "Not Not EE".
- What is something ? -> all it can be less what it can't.
- What does "can" refer to ? -> to the fulfilled condition (this is A)
- What does "less" refer to ? -> to exclusion (this is B)
- What does "can't" refer to ? -> to the non-fulfilled condition (this is C)
- What does "condition" refer to ? -> it depends on what we're talkking about.
- What are we talking about ? -> EEs
- What is an EE ? -> it is X.
- For X, what is A ? -> a description (1 condition) + additional requirements (1 condition)
- For X, what is B ? ->it is what it is absolutely
- For X what is C ? -> it is what it is absolutely
- How many conditions (containing maybe subconditions) does X = an EE need to be ? -> 2, a description and additional requirements (AddReq).
-What are the possible surge as for the fulffillment of the 2 conditions on any EE ? -> there are 3. Either the two conditions are fulfilled, or just one, or none.
- What if the two conditions are fulfilled ? -> the EE IS
- What if only one condition is fulfilled ? -> the EE is NOT, for one reason.
- What if none of the two conditions is fulfilled -> the EE is NOT..NOT. It is NOt, two times, for two reasons.
Example : What does a PP1 need to be ?
-> 1 pre-condition setting the scene to measurement ; three P1s in a row (knowing that internal does not kill)
- > 1 condition : acceleration on the dependant variable
-> 1 AddReq : acceleration on the independant variable
What possibility can surge once three P1s in a row appear ?
-> 4 possibilities
- there is acc on price AND the AddReq is fulfilled = there IS PP1
- there is acc on price AND the AddReq is NOT fulfilled = there is NOT PP1
- there is NOT acc on price AND the AddReq is fulfilled = there is NOT PP1
- there is NOT acc on price AND the AddReq is NOT fulfilled = there is NOT NOT PP1.
Not sure about all this, but it does make sense for me at the moment. If true, then it would open the gate towards all "Not/Not" EEs concept.
@WchPl
Attached is a doc found elsewhere FOR TAPING. It is not new, but you may not have seen it.
In looking at your "more info" and "less info" methods of taping, you are not considering volume, or you are and just not showing the volume. It (volume) does affect 2-adjacent-bars points 1/2/3. The doc is helpful with that in mind.
Also, remember to apply "the rules" for FS.
1) BOT1 ... a measurable trough creates RTL. A non-internal with increasing volume creates the break. If the BO bar crosses but does not close beyond the RTL, you have a FBO. If you do not have a volume trough BEFORE the break, your RTL is mis-placed.
2) BMRev ... A BM price breach. Geometrically, at the moment of breach, the previous point 2 becomes point 1. A breach of a BM with an internal bar "suggests" a mis-identified BM.
Thank you
@tiddlywinks , it's nice to see you again. Thank you for taking some of your time to provide content, I appreciate it a lot.
I'm studying your post.
In addition to that, I had already seen that pdf you attached, but I did not study it thoroughly.
I'll do it now.
I'll post a log and chart annotated when i've done it, so in some 2hours or so, trying to incorporate :
- what I understand about the correct way of taping
- what I understand about the correct way of ID BO,T1
- what I understand about squishing
- what are the cascading effects generated by all this
AND
- I'll give my brain a little rest before attempting to label turn/trends. I feel like something in my mind has moved a bit as for the way to use it. I have to review and observe how the MT/MR are built. I feel like I see now something I did not see before. Don't know yet where it will lead me, nor if it will be correct.
Anyway, as stated by
@Sprout , the most important thing now for me is to deal with MT/MR. And the only exercise that lead to this is posting logged and annotated charts, and that's exactly what i'll begin to do ASA I send this post.
Have a great day
