Making JH' SCT and all his material alive

[WchPl]

MADA on 060719 part 1 & Log

I've seen inconsistencies in my previous posted chart. I've tried to see something new with the debrief, but I can't solve what I see that seems bizarre to me.
I'll deal with that later.

NB : I've now my new printed Log, including everything and with no mess anymore as for bars numbers. All is calibrated

 

[WchPl]

MADA on 060719 parts 2/3 & Logs

 

[WchPl]

MADA on 060719 parts 4/5 & Logs

Later in the day or tomorrow morning, I'll produce a writing about all I see new, all the details I need to refine, the questions that surged in my mind along those two last charts.

But for now, let's have a break.

Temperature hits 40°C today again..

 

[Sprout]

Looks like you are getting the hang of it.

Some refinements;
On your log, you should have two columns next to the turn type that signify; D-D, D-nD and nD-D that you pencil in. The repetition creates LTM in addition to the abstraction c,a,b.

The 30m, 5m, Sentiment are the rightmost columns. Match is an invention. L or S, up or down arrows that signify the close in relation to the doji on the 30m and the 5m (sentiment of the dominant leg). The third column is the sentiment of the turn type arrow direction.
Three arrows in the same direction is enter if sidelined, reverse/exit when opposite the existing position.

Near the turn type annotations should be colored boxes that signifies if the turn/EE combo was found on the Move Reversal lookup sheet. A colored box is a move reversal, no box is hold-thru, unless a FS dictates otherwise. The box should be the same size as the trend type box.


Keep up the MADA routine and reap the rewards!

 

[WchPl]

On your log, you should have two columns next to the turn type that signify; D-D, D-nD and nD-D that you pencil in. The repetition creates LTM in addition to the abstraction c,a,b.

What a pitty I forgot this and just printed a bunch of blank logs yesterday ...

The 30m, 5m, Sentiment are the rightmost columns. Match is an invention. L or S, up or down arrows that signify the close in relation to the doji on the 30m and the 5m (sentiment of the dominant leg). The third column is the sentiment of the turn type arrow direction.
Three arrows in the same direction is enter if sidelined, reverse/exit when opposite the existing position.

As for my invention of the match, I understand now I had missed what you had said previously when you talked about a column for matching sentiment between 30min and 5min.
Understood now for the last three coumns. Thank you

Near the turn type annotations should be colored boxes that signifies if the turn/EE combo was found on the Move Reversal lookup sheet. A colored box is a move reversal, no box is hold-thru, unless a FS dictates otherwise. The box should be the same size as the trend type box.

Oh ok ! I thought I was to color the turn-type bow itself, not to add another box. Thank you !


Gonna keep up the MADA routine... don't know yet how far I am from reaping the rewards... work and see...


Thanks a lot for providing some refinement guidelines

Best day to you

 

[WchPl]

Later in the day or tomorrow morning, I'll produce a writing about all I see new, all the details I need to refine, the questions that surged in my mind along those two last charts.

1- OB's
I won't develop much because I feel I'm getting it more and more precisely every day. It's clearing itself as much as I do MADA routine. I've dissected things in a way that give me confidence with when OB surge on any particular scenario. Not saying I'm ok 100% with that, but it's going towards it.

2- BO,T1 on INT w/ DEC volume
One thing I wonder and that I want to be sure about, is if the close of an INT breaks out prior esstablished true rtl on a T1 or with a T1 already present, there is BO,T1 or not. I think there is, but I'm a bit uncertain about it. What stimulates my wonder, is because we're not to measure volume on this kind of PC. So, there would be two possibilities :
-either there is a T1 already present in the trend when this BO of true rtl appears on INT. IIn this case I'd say i'm sure there is a BO,T1.
- or, and in this case it's a bit more tricky for me, there is no T1 already present AND then comes a SYM for example, with DEC volume AND its close is beyond true rtl (Trtl). In this case, there is BO, BUT being as we're not allowed to measure volume, I think that stating there is BO,T1 on that bar is a bit "forcing the path". Like...there is BO, on a T1 but on a T1 that is not supposed to be taken into a count cause volume can't be measured. Upto now, I've seen more logic to consider there is BO,T1 in this case, but one more time I'm a bit unsure about this, that's why I'm talking about this.

3- Reference to use for measuring volume
Let's say we have a P1ass on bar 1. Vol is at 10K
On bar 2 : T1. Vol is at 6K.
On bar 3 : wait. Vol is at 4K.
on bar 4 : measurable bar and Vol is at 5K. Is this bar to be compared to prior bar ? or to last measured bar ?

I think it's compared to prior measured bar, it would be a T1 repeat.
Unsure, althoug it makes more sense to me see T1 rather than a P2 (if we consider the prior bar, which was not measured).

4- P1ass on next measurable bar
We have already talked about this before but I'm still not confident with my understanding of it.
Let's say we have a PP! EE on the bar.0, wich assigns then P1 on next bar.
Next bar is a wait. What I wonder is if we must wait a measurable bar to assign P1 or no matter what next bar will show as for the PC and volume and we assign P1 on it.

This echoes to the LAT situation. Unless I understood bad, I had exposed an example in which I had a PP! EE, so next bar needed to see a P1 assigned on it. But this bar was a LAT2. At this very moment, we could not know we were in a LAT. Then LAT3 appeared and the LAT revealed itself*. Then next bar came along and it was a LAT4 and as on any LAT it's the first measured bar of the LAT (unless we have a retro backwards). It had been said that it was on this precise LAT4 that the P1 must be assigned, leaving LAT2 and LAT3 without measurement.
I wonder if what I say here is correct, and if it applies also when we just have an INT. Up to now, ASA I know I must assign P1 on next bar, no matter next bar will be INT or any other PC, I assign the P1 to it. And this would contradict what I said above. The fact that we've discussed about this case only for LAT, did not make me think it's only applicable for LAT. On the contrary I think now if on bar 1 there is a PP!, then next bar will receive a P1 ONLY is that next bar is measurable. In addition to that, when an INT comes, how can one already know it's a LAT2 ? It's impossible.
One more time, I'm unsure.


5 - Degap and squish


Degap

Although it has been stated I'm ok with that now and I know I do degap everytime it's required, I still have doubts coming from inconsistencies I perceive when I'm doing MADA.

Example :

If one wants to follow geometry, strictly, and encapsulate the LAT that appears here, then one is to use the yellow rectangle.

BUT

If one wants to use the degapped position of bar 1 and build its LAT (which remains existing after degap), then one is to use the following pink rectangle.

As one can see, it can change a lot of things to use/draw/consider it that way.
Logically I'd say the right way is to use/draw/consider the second way.
But I'm unsure.

Another thing I wonder about degap is there :

If one, as it is required here, does degap and all the information of the first bar is moved downwards of 1 tick, one will have a BMrev on bar 2.
If one considers this as true, then it takes to the old examples I had provided with multi LAT's moving each time a degap was to be made inside of it. This led to two things :
- an overwhelmed chart
- @Sprout to tell me it was the complicated way of degapping.

I don't know how to deal with that. I still don't see the easy way of doing it, especially without losing information.
The way I've been degapping for a while now is simply moving n-1 bar and make its close match the n open AND consider all the left side is already degapped until this bar n-1 I do degap concretely. Most of time, the situation illustrated above does not happen. So far, cool. But when it does happen, and the same kind of problem happens with LAT's as discussed more above, it makes surge that question into my mind and creates fuzzyness.


Squish

When I began, recently, to squish internals, I did not realize at first what I'm gonna expose here. It's quite simple.

Let's only talk about the form, and ignore sents and everything else.

Bar 1 :
Bar 2 : SYM. If I squish this bar into prior one, I won't see bar 2 anymore and will just have to consider bar 1.
Bar 3 : compared to non squished bar 2, it's and XB, BUT compared to squished bar 2 into bar 1, we have another SYM.
What I wonder is...until when do we squish ? when do we consider last bar as...like it appeared without squishing action ? It echoes for me to the degap action.

If I consider bar 3 compared to squished bar 2, I have anither SYM on bar 3.
And then I'd have :
Bar 4 : SYM
Bar 5 : FBP
Bar 6 : FTP
Bar 7 : XB

I wonder if the above is correct or if it is the following that is correct :

Bar 1 :
Bar 2 : SYM
Bar 3 : SYM (because of LAT, if not already XB)
Bar 4 : XR
Bar 5 : XR
Bar 6 : XB
Bar 7 : XB

Or maybe even something else...




Little break, an in half an hour, I'll begin a new log.

 

[Simples]

1- OB's
I won't develop much because I feel I'm getting it more and more precisely every day. It's clearing itself as much as I do MADA routine. I've dissected things in a way that give me confidence with when OB surge on any particular scenario. Not saying I'm ok 100% with that, but it's going towards it.

2- BO,T1 on INT w/ DEC volume
One thing I wonder and that I want to be sure about, is if the close of an INT breaks out prior esstablished true rtl on a T1 or with a T1 already present, there is BO,T1 or not. I think there is, but I'm a bit uncertain about it. What stimulates my wonder, is because we're not to measure volume on this kind of PC. So, there would be two possibilities :
-either there is a T1 already present in the trend when this BO of true rtl appears on INT. IIn this case I'd say i'm sure there is a BO,T1.
- or, and in this case it's a bit more tricky for me, there is no T1 already present AND then comes a SYM for example, with DEC volume AND its close is beyond true rtl (Trtl). In this case, there is BO, BUT being as we're not allowed to measure volume, I think that stating there is BO,T1 on that bar is a bit "forcing the path". Like...there is BO, on a T1 but on a T1 that is not supposed to be taken into a count cause volume can't be measured. Upto now, I've seen more logic to consider there is BO,T1 in this case, but one more time I'm a bit unsure about this, that's why I'm talking about this.

3- Reference to use for measuring volume
Let's say we have a P1ass on bar 1. Vol is at 10K
On bar 2 : T1. Vol is at 6K.
On bar 3 : wait. Vol is at 4K.
on bar 4 : measurable bar and Vol is at 5K. Is this bar to be compared to prior bar ? or to last measured bar ?

I think it's compared to prior measured bar, it would be a T1 repeat.
Unsure, althoug it makes more sense to me see T1 rather than a P2 (if we consider the prior bar, which was not measured).

4- P1ass on next measurable bar
We have already talked about this before but I'm still not confident with my understanding of it.
Let's say we have a PP! EE on the bar.0, wich assigns then P1 on next bar.
Next bar is a wait. What I wonder is if we must wait a measurable bar to assign P1 or no matter what next bar will show as for the PC and volume and we assign P1 on it.

This echoes to the LAT situation. Unless I understood bad, I had exposed an example in which I had a PP! EE, so next bar needed to see a P1 assigned on it. But this bar was a LAT2. At this very moment, we could not know we were in a LAT. Then LAT3 appeared and the LAT revealed itself*. Then next bar came along and it was a LAT4 and as on any LAT it's the first measured bar of the LAT (unless we have a retro backwards). It had been said that it was on this precise LAT4 that the P1 must be assigned, leaving LAT2 and LAT3 without measurement.
I wonder if what I say here is correct, and if it applies also when we just have an INT. Up to now, ASA I know I must assign P1 on next bar, no matter next bar will be INT or any other PC, I assign the P1 to it. And this would contradict what I said above. The fact that we've discussed about this case only for LAT, did not make me think it's only applicable for LAT. On the contrary I think now if on bar 1 there is a PP!, then next bar will receive a P1 ONLY is that next bar is measurable. In addition to that, when an INT comes, how can one already know it's a LAT2 ? It's impossible.
One more time, I'm unsure.


5 - Degap and squish


Degap

Although it has been stated I'm ok with that now and I know I do degap everytime it's required, I still have doubts coming from inconsistencies I perceive when I'm doing MADA.

Example :
View attachment 205209

If one wants to follow geometry, strictly, and encapsulate the LAT that appears here, then one is to use the yellow rectangle.

BUT

If one wants to use the degapped position of bar 1 and build its LAT (which remains existing after degap), then one is to use the following pink rectangle.


View attachment 205210

As one can see, it can change a lot of things to use/draw/consider it that way.
Logically I'd say the right way is to use/draw/consider the second way.
But I'm unsure.

Another thing I wonder about degap is there :

View attachment 205212
If one, as it is required here, does degap and all the information of the first bar is moved downwards of 1 tick, one will have a BMrev on bar 2.
If one considers this as true, then it takes to the old examples I had provided with multi LAT's moving each time a degap was to be made inside of it. This led to two things :
- an overwhelmed chart
- @Sprout to tell me it was the complicated way of degapping.

I don't know how to deal with that. I still don't see the easy way of doing it, especially without losing information.
The way I've been degapping for a while now is simply moving n-1 bar and make its close match the n open AND consider all the left side is already degapped until this bar n-1 I do degap concretely. Most of time, the situation illustrated above does not happen. So far, cool. But when it does happen, and the same kind of problem happens with LAT's as discussed more above, it makes surge that question into my mind and creates fuzzyness.


Squish

When I began, recently, to squish internals, I did not realize at first what I'm gonna expose here. It's quite simple.

View attachment 205213

Let's only talk about the form, and ignore sents and everything else.

Bar 1 :
Bar 2 : SYM. If I squish this bar into prior one, I won't see bar 2 anymore and will just have to consider bar 1.
Bar 3 : compared to non squished bar 2, it's and XB, BUT compared to squished bar 2 into bar 1, we have another SYM.
What I wonder is...until when do we squish ? when do we consider last bar as...like it appeared without squishing action ? It echoes for me to the degap action.

If I consider bar 3 compared to squished bar 2, I have anither SYM on bar 3.
And then I'd have :
Bar 4 : SYM
Bar 5 : FBP
Bar 6 : FTP
Bar 7 : XB

I wonder if the above is correct or if it is the following that is correct :

Bar 1 :
Bar 2 : SYM
Bar 3 : SYM (because of LAT, if not already XB)
Bar 4 : XR
Bar 5 : XR
Bar 6 : XB
Bar 7 : XB

Or maybe even something else...




Little break, an in half an hour, I'll begin a new log.

1. OB Measure and FS on upper level. Lower level NEXT. OB PP's on DV.

2. Suppression means squish. Still M&A bar-bar with time, events follow volume OOE.

3. Annnotate UL, both for translation and INT.

4. Lat3 yields Lat1-3. Lat4 always activate Retro from Lat1, unless/until retro. Retro will rewrite not trading history. W is again squish.

5. Consider differing rules for the 3 fractals according to their purposes. Bar by bar MA follow strict bar sequence and do not borrow future data unless retro, or make information packets dissappear. Every valid bar in TS used.

 

[WchPl]

1. OB Measure and FS on upper level. Lower level NEXT. OB PP's on DV.

Yes I think I'm clear with that.

2. Suppression means squish. Still M&A bar-bar with time, events follow volume OOE.

I can't read between the lines of this writing.

3. Annnotate UL, both for translation and INT

From what I've always seen and read, UL is only for INT, not for translations
AND
What I tried to express is that I wonder which volume level is to be used when between two measurable bars, there is a wait. I 'm trying to understand what you say, but it's a struggle for me at the moment.

4. Lat3 yields Lat1-3. Lat4 always activate Retro from Lat1, unless/until retro. Retro will rewrite not trading history. W is again squish.

Hmm... Lat 4 always activates retro from Lat1 unless/until retro... I don't get you here. If Lat4 is in the shadow of Lat1 so yes rtro is activated from Lat1. If not in the shadow, only from Lat4.

With that said, if suppression means squish, squish must maybe mean suppression as well. Then, if it is so, it would mean P1 can't be assigned on next bar is this next bar is a wait.
That's my DD from what you say.

5. Consider differing rules for the 3 fractals according to their purposes. Bar by bar MA follow strict bar sequence and do not borrow future data unless retro, or make information packets dissappear. Every valid bar in TS used.

I don't understand what you mean here :/



Thanks a lot for your post @Simples , hope you're doing great !

_______________________________________________________________________

By the way :

MADA on 06/27/19 & Log part 1.

The last chart I was on will quickly be unavailable as for datas, so I made a little jump onwards of some days in order to neither catch present chart, nor be catched by time. I need maybe to accelerate a bit my rythm of logging. Currently I'm at 1 or 1 1/2 log a day + all the complementary work (readings, EE catalog, breaks, thoughts etc.).
I'll try to achieve 2 logs a day from now.

This snippet is interesting in that it made me remember I had another thing to expose in my post exposing the little issues I have and that has been generously answered by @Simples :

What if on Lat3, we have UL ? do we measure ?
That's simple, and I think we are to do so.

AND

I find myself here in the situation I exposed in 5- / Squish.

Here is a larger view of the LAT coming up :

Lat1 is there.
Lat 2 comes, it's absolutely a SYM so it's squished into Lat1. If it is squished, accordingly to my prior DD from @Simples' write up, it's suppressed. If it's suppressed, it won't be used to ID any PC nor vol measurement.
Lat 3 comes on INC vol. I assume, here, UL. So we measure vol and get a T1 cause we compare to last measurable/measured bar AND concerning PC, Lat 3 is pasted next to Lat 1 which gives relatively a SYM, although it's absolutely a StR. By the way, if this is correct, is it useful to annotate like I did the StR ? I think it is not.
If I continue in the same way, I'll have Lat 2, Lat3, and Lat4 all SYM, relatively. RelativeDBMS...ok, it sounds logical. I can then expect some Lats to have long series of SYM/FTP/FBP, relatively.

 

[Simples]

Yes I think I'm clear with that.


I can't read between the lines of this writing.


From what I've always seen and read, UL is only for INT, not for translations
AND
What I tried to express is that I wonder which volume level is to be used when between two measurable bars, there is a wait. I 'm trying to understand what you say, but it's a struggle for me at the moment.

Hmm... Lat 4 always activates retro from Lat1 unless/until retro... I don't get you here. If Lat4 is in the shadow of Lat1 so yes rtro is activated from Lat1. If not in the shadow, only from Lat4.

With that said, if suppression means squish, squish must maybe mean suppression as well. Then, if it is so, it would mean P1 can't be assigned on next bar is this next bar is a wait.
That's my DD from what you say.



I don't understand what you mean here :/



Thanks a lot for your post @Simples , hope you're doing great !

_______________________________________________________________________

By the way :

MADA on 06/27/19 & Log part 1.

The last chart I was on will quickly be unavailable as for datas, so I made a little jump onwards of some days in order to neither catch present chart, nor be catched by time. I need maybe to accelerate a bit my rythm of logging. Currently I'm at 1 or 1 1/2 log a day + all the complementary work (readings, EE catalog, breaks, thoughts etc.).
I'll try to achieve 2 logs a day from now.

View attachment 205214

This snippet is interesting in that it made me remember I had another thing to expose in my post exposing the little issues I have and that has been generously answered by @Simples :

What if on Lat3, we have UL ? do we measure ?
That's simple, and I think we are to do so.

AND

I find myself here in the situation I exposed in 5- / Squish.

Here is a larger view of the LAT coming up :

View attachment 205216

Lat1 is there.
Lat 2 comes, it's absolutely a SYM so it's squished into Lat1. If it is squished, accordingly to my prior DD from @Simples' write up, it's suppressed. If it's suppressed, it won't be used to ID any PC nor vol measurement.
Lat 3 comes on INC vol. I assume, here, UL. So we measure vol and get a T1 cause we compare to last measurable/measured bar AND concerning PC, Lat 3 is pasted next to Lat 1 which gives relatively a SYM, although it's absolutely a StR. By the way, if this is correct, is it useful to annotate like I did the StR ? I think it is not.
If I continue in the same way, I'll have Lat 2, Lat3, and Lat4 all SYM, relatively. RelativeDBMS...ok, it sounds logical. I can then expect some Lats to have long series of SYM/FTP/FBP, relatively.

2. Int DV => W....

3. Jack charts show U on UL bars. UL refers to the "larger" bar in a given measurement context. Annotating this similarly may aide DD. Suppression comes from price, not volume, and affects only measurability and larger bar sentiment. Unmeasured volume not used for comparisons.

4. Sorry, meant bo instead of Retro.

5. Only one of the 3 fractals are assigned volume names. So the rules for all 3 and their RDBMS must be DD. Suppression only affect volume handling. Squishing follow from INT, but doesn't remove price data. Squish is like a quantum effect, bars both exists individually, and get squished together for certain purposes. Lat=INT. INT will demand some fanning. Lat4 retro means max consecutive W bars held = 2.

Update: Reviewing jack chart I see "U" on IV from W bar1, but lat 2-3 being W on Not Retro. So keep what affects P distinct from effects on/from V. Not sure why, but may help later if retro.

 

[WchPl]

It's not that obvious for me to understand what you state here, but nevertheless it does provide a helpful path. Thank you very much.
I'll continue my log with what I understand and see what happens.
Discussing and refining in team is beginning to appear great to me nowadays