I am aware from another website where you used to commentate, that RHs are a significant portion of your setups.
Yes; this is true. RH's and "things like RH's", anyway. The RH is just one specific example of "post-retracement trend-continuation entries" (as I call them), and that covers quite a lot of my trading, albeit with small trends on fast charts.
But it may be the case that only certain trading styles are readily portable
It may be.
I'd guess that most are, myself, to be honest, given my feeling that "most charts are inherently fractal, most of the time", and given that I don't really believe in "noise"
per se, and given the non-linear relationship between volatility and time-frames.
But I might be wrong, and of course my experience is limited - and perhaps more than most people's in the senses that (a) I started my process of "analyzing in detail and doing more of what works and less of what doesn't work" at a very early stage, and (b) there are vast areas of trading (individual stocks, options, bonds, spreads) about which I know very, very little and with which I have no experience at all.
Maybe the hard work was done applying his thinking to the spot market!
Possibly - not sure about this.
I've also applied what I learned from the examples from which Volman teaches (spot forex on tick charts) to index futures on volume charts, and in the past those from which Brooks teaches (ES on timed charts) to spot forex, without encountering any significant apparent difficulties, though.
It certainly seems to me that they're probably all fairly interchangeable, and that "charts are charts".
I was slighty surprised by your comment above about RH's on M5/M15 charts, and am happy to discuss them, if it helps (and you're welcome to send a p.m., if you don't want to do that publicly: I do reply to them - not always quickly, depending on how busy I am, but I do reply).