Market System of Operation

Secondary trend triples

The ka and KbEE's

In volume testing it is possible to have sequences of T2P's and T2F's be qalternating solutions.

A test procedure has to be applied without nuances or anomalies. Neither of these facets can be part of a system of operation of markets. Most CW OODA based orientations omit this constraint and allow incompleteness. All quant activity does this incompleteness violation.

Two sequences emerge: T2P to T2F to T2P OR T2F to T2P to T2F.

The n+1 rule is involked and the C band pass is tested.

A band pass on the former triple is Ka. A band Pass on the later is Kb.

A failure is either a peak or a P3F depending upon the nature of the secondary BO. If an extreme LVBO occurs you use an EE already described. If an extreme HVBO peak occurs another EE is used.
 
Quote from smwbbe:

PP3 illustration
More...
The illustration would have challenged me. Bar two looks like a T1 and therefore bar three like a P2. The illustration maybe needs an additional note that in THIS example bar two is not used because it is an internal. Correct?
 
Quote from frenchfry:

Look at the highs and lows. High and low of current bar greater than high and low of previous bar then you have an XB. If high and low are lower then you have XR.

Your question marks should be:

XB
XR
XB
XR
XB
XR

I think what confuses you is that for example based on highs and lows the bar should be a XR but the bar's close is higher than the bar's open.
More...

Thanks FrenchFry. Yes, the bar coloring was my confusion. If I now understand correctly, the bar color (ie close in relation to open) is not a concern. It is all about the "formation" itself. That definitely changes things for me. Shaves quite a few ms off my analysis time! :)
 
band review

I still have to post the EE's that occur in the A band.

Thus there are still 8 bottles of beer on the wall. we have completed 27 so far.

By using price for permission we get to measure 7 cases for volume. These independent variable elements build trends as the middle of trending. EE's end the trends by analyzing zones of volume values. All possible elments are distributed across the zones.

EE's designate turns in price which end and begin dominant or non-dominanant legs in price trend fractals.

turns serve two purposes: to take profits and to begin new holds for future profit taking.

Thus the trading strategy the market dictates is a hold reversal strategy.

A table was created to define the price turn types. (Se Modrian Table). The table contains only C turns which are Dom to Dom turns.

There are two other types of turns: a turns (Dom to non-dom) and b turns (Nondom to Dom)

See the Pattern to find the location of such types of turns.

the deductive proccess underlying this tooling setup is complex by CW and OODA standards. By Scientific Method standards it is a simple process.
 
Quote from tiddlywinks:

Thanks FrenchFry. Yes, the bar coloring was my confusion. If I now understand correctly, the bar color (ie close in relation to open) is not a concern. It is all about the "formation" itself. That definitely changes things for me. :)
More...
Correct. If you look at the illustrations of the ten cases then you don't see open and close drawn.

In the past... if I recall it correctly... then the example I gave you would had been labeled as IBGS ( Intra bar Gaussian shift). But if you look at Jack's current posts in this thread then at least at this stage this is not being used.

P.S. As you are using Sierra charts you are lucky. There seems to be an Intra-bar degapper available. Look in the JH software thread.
 
Got it! Thank you.
I previously implemented some of the simple stuff like DU and FRV into my trading with excellent results, and I want to see what the actual 20 day training can bring. Jack is an extremely generous fellow, offering the training to anyone. I don't know if I will be a purist of the JH methods, but I do know that I know there is much here. Thanks again for the assist.
 
Quote from frenchfry:

...

P.S. As you are using Sierra charts you are lucky. There seems to be an Intra-bar degapper available. Look in the JH software thread.
More...

Well, the topic of bar-by-bar degapping is a deal-breaker for me. I looked at that concept (and the Sierra code). I won't say anymore in this thread about it.
 
Okay, I wanted to post a short review for tomorrow.

I have all of the vocab cards, and I will attempt to go through them and expand some when I am able to, and then attempt to make a document which can be printed with the correct size margins to be cut out and pasted on note-cards for others as Jack indicated.

It seems that we are doing okay with the posting of charts to resolve questions, but I will still attempt to post replays for each of the days so they can be referenced back to upon any future questions.

---

I would like to begin attempting the Volume Test Procedure tomorrow on the five charts, but I still have a question that I would like clarification on in order to avoid error.

I do not know whether the squished bar effect or an increasing volume bar from the previous bar takes precedence for dictating permission to measure volume. Is a volume event assigned within a lateral on each bar with increasing volume over the previous bar, or is a volume element assigned only if we encounter a volume bar higher than any of the previous bars in the entire formation? I am also unsure what effect RETRO has on this process, but do not want to get ahead of myself.

I have tried to find a more simple example to demonstrate my question. See [12-19] Bar 79-81 in attachment.

Log Actions for Bar 79 are [XR, Check De-Gap, Measure Volume]
Log Actions for Bar 80 are [SYM, Draw Arrow to 79, Write UL for 79, Event is WAIT]

Now, which of the following is correct for Bar 81?

1. [Lat 3, Draw Arrow to 79, Event WAIT]

or

2. [Lat 3, Write UL for 81, Measure Volume]
 

Attachments

Quote from llIHeroic:

...I do not know whether the squished bar effect or an increasing volume bar from the previous bar takes precedence for dictating permission to measure volume. Is a volume event assigned within a lateral on each bar with increasing volume over the previous bar, or is a volume element assigned only if we encounter a volume bar higher than any of the previous bars in the entire formation? I am also unsure what effect RETRO has on this process, but do not want to get ahead of myself.

I have tried to find a more simple example to demonstrate my question. See [12-19] Bar 79-81 in attachment.

Log Actions for Bar 79 are [XR, Check De-Gap, Measure Volume]
Log Actions for Bar 80 are [SYM, Draw Arrow to 79, Write UL for 79, Event is WAIT]

Now, which of the following is correct for Bar 81?

1. [Lat 3, Draw Arrow to 79, Event WAIT]

or

2. [Lat 3, Write UL for 81, Measure Volume]
More...
3x5 cards are nice if they contain useful information. Writing "Price case" only for Laterl didn't help you before and didn't help you here. A drawing might have helped also putting a an equation, something like: "If highs and lows of bar 2 and 3 <= bar 1....". So your cards are for quick reference.

On another sheet of paper you put more details. Like: "Bar 1...., bar 2...wait, bar 3... Lat3....wait..." You also add: "Caveat: Lat4..."

The same you do for price cases, wait and UL. In your glossary you will sometimes have some terms used multiple times in different contexts and explained in different ways.

Here is the hint for your question: Look in the other thread for "Caveat", "Lat4", "larger volume" (or higher), "Wait", "log(ing)", "right to left", etc.. With this you should find the answer to your questions. Those things are discussed at the beginning when Jerred started logging. And then add what you find to your glossary. I hope this helps.
 
Well, I tried for several hours this morning to get correctly colored Replays with NinjaTrader for our week of drills. I encountered several obstacles, and eventually could not solve how to have volume appear for the first 60 minutes of each day on the charts.

I had to resort to capturing pictures with the default charting software, but unfortunately it is very poor. I do not think the scale can be adjusted to one point, the correct coloring is not available, and I do not think grid-lines are able to be added into the chart.

These things may be possible, but I do not know how to do them. Navigation of computer software is not a strong point for me. I feel unpleasant that I have been unable to provide the charts for us, but hopefully these images will be better than nothing.
 

Attachments

You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top