On 10-case geometry and beyond

[tiddlywinks]

As we know, B-band and examples of bands-beyond (valid or not), as well as corresponding explanatory materials is minimal.

Sorry to reiterate already presented material, but it is necessary to ensure we stay focused on what the current difficulties are...

P1 and T1 define A band top and bottom repsctively. P2 could be in or out of A band. A geomtric trend is established by P2.

B band comes into effect with the advent of T2P. See crosshatched zone.

C band is between T2P and T2F. it is shaded in blue.

we do not use D and E but they are inside of the Blue.

F band is both above and below the shown bands. Four mini zones apply. Once you understand the concept of zones and begin to use them, then they show "context".

A-band, as far as it's boundaries and it's activation, I am sure, we are clear on. Moving on...

B-band as described above is activated in conjunction with a VTP result of T2P.
And here the "confusion" begins... we are not discussing the B-band EE's at this stage.

A VTP measurement of a "first" T2P comes after a P2.
For a "first" T2P to be ID'd, volume is required to be > T1. Volume of < T1 "kiils" a T2P ID.

Lets look at next, following a T2P: there are 3 possibilities for next following a T2P....
Another T2P, a T2F or an EE, exactly which EE, we are not there, we are looking at next.

A next T2P is required to be >= the previous T2P. With B-band active as of the "first" T2P, the upper limit for a next T2P is P2. The lower limit for a next T2P is the first (or previous) T2P.

If the lower limit is not reached, only T2F or an EE is possible. VTP measurement of a "first" T2F ID, comes after a T2P, and volume is required to be > T1. Volume of < T1 "kills" a T2F ID.

Lets look at a few EE's now...
If a "first" T2P is killed it is because volume is < T1. Clearly an Ab EE. B-band is not even active.
If a "next" T2P is killed it is because volume is less than the first (or previous) T2P. This is NOT an EE, as a first T2F is possible. Here lives confusion. B-band is active.

VTP allows T2F after T2P or T2F. B-band has a lower limit of T2P, --BUT-- T2F **is** lower volume than T2P. If a B-band EE is applied, a sequence will NEVER be allowed to progress beyond T2P!! Ab or maybe Aa EE ( NB: there is a suble diffence (besides P1 placement) between Aa and Ba) are explanatory sequence resets imo.

If a "first" T2F is killed, it is because volume is < T1.
The argument can be made this is an Ab EE. It could also be argued it is a B-band EE which are based on ID'd peaks rather than lower limits.

Where Im at..
The B-band EE Ba has 2 quite different defines. One definition on the handwritten B through K bands sheet and another definition on the explanatory B-band EE's post from Jack, I believe from the butt thread but Im not sure about that. In any case, I believe the butt thread post is more current and I accept that Ba definition over the older Ba definition on the B through K bands sheet. If you read closely, you will see the Bc definitions are the same however. The line "Bc is not seen" adds further confusion since Bc is included on the top portion of modrian table set B, C, and D.

Let me now add more spice... T2F activates C-band. C-band has only one EE. Previously, I posted a snip from Jack regarding n+1 and the C-band. I mentioned how the mixed tense of his words was concerning. This concern is confirmed IMO. Just saying.

Bands F, G, H and K all have references to T2P and/or T2F in very specific, yet to be understood ways.

Writing code brings these matters to light.

 

[Sprout]

Jack on Bandpass.

<snip>
2. Does the Ba bandpass volume have to be >T2P but <P2, i.e. would it have been a Fb (or Ca?) if volume was >P2?

This question means that you are beginning to use bandwidth in your reasoning. Good work. As a trend moves forward, there are more and more possibilities for an End Effect (EE) to occur since there are more bands for a forming price bar to drop into.

At this point the trader's mind moves to "anticipate". This is unlike betting, hoping or price hitting some guessed at target or guessed at stop. Some well known traders and authors do get this inclination which they call zones. For them, zones are places that seem to have some unconscious relevance.

For those using a systemic approach, the independent variable does, mathematically, define zones. This is a concept based materialization. The concept is what in trading is called "context". Nothing is true in trading if the context of the circumstance is also true. Most people are very unsophisitcated so they never think in these terms. they stick with fear, anxiety and anger as their guides.

At any time all bands that have been established remain in force. you mention a few. FF requested that I post all this information since he did not want to go through the intellectuaal development himself. Not many would. So you see on the sheet for End Effects, I also added the contextual range of volune that satisfies the "true" of the End Effect. Only a finite number may exist so I listed all of them.
<snip>

Italics for emphasis

 

[tiddlywinks]

. As a trend moves forward, there are more and more possibilities for an End Effect (EE) to occur since there are more bands for a forming price bar to drop into.

At any time all bands that have been established remain in force.

Not exactly an "answer" to the question that was asked, but certainly a validation of sorts of my mention/idea/invention/whatever, of using a reverse band hierarchy for determining and applying EE's. Reverse band hierarchy not even necessary. Really good to see it in writing!!

 

[Sprout]

I woke up and I was thinking about bands and turn types etc. (seems to occupy my mind a lot). If I apply RDBMS with SCT was thinking the Trend type would be the container, turn type is the trading fractal (C turn to C turn or ftt to ftt trading), EE is the sub-fractal (PP's and A-bands), B-bands and onward are sub-sub-fractals and so on. As long as volume doesn't break-out of the A-band or activate FS we seem to have more bands which I feel like explains remaining in a container.

Also, as I was sifting through some charts by Jack, I realized he had Fd LVBO even though there were several bars retracing after P2. This had me thinking about matching gaussians and containers with RDBMS. It seems to make sense since P1 to P2 is the x2x gaussian and x2y retrace can happen after P2. I've been using BO,T1 once RTL gets crossed even after P2 but it would appear I had this part wrong.

I think this is what tiddlywinks tried to help me see but I'm not 100% positive lol. However, as I view the charts and annotate it looks more accurate than before by applying this thought so far.

On the Modrian table, there are BO,T1's after P2's which is evident by having FS on each of the four types of trends. B-turns are associated with pt3 of a Set C, D trends. The A,B turns are associated with the 2r2b and 2b2r after the b2b or r2r of the container.

 

[Sprout]

Not exactly an "answer" to the question that was asked, but certainly a validation of sorts of my mention/idea/invention/whatever, of using a reverse band hierarchy for determining and applying EE's. Reverse band hierarchy not even necessary. Really good to see it in writing!!

I haven't responded your post yet, however here is an example of Ab with T2P being ID'd on the bar before.

 

[NeedToLearn]

On the Modrian table, there are BO,T1's after P2's which is evident by having FS on each of the four types of trends. B-turns are associated with pt3 of a Set C, D trends. The A,B turns are associated with the 2r2b and 2b2r after the b2b or r2r of the container.

Should the RTL once established by T1 stay intact for the full duration of the segment until an EE occurs then? and at any given moment we can have a BO,T1 with a bar closing out of it?

 

[Sprout]

Should the RTL once established by T1 stay intact for the full duration of the segment until an EE occurs then? and at any given moment we can have a BO,T1 with a bar closing out of it?

Personally, I’ve gone back and forth on this. With SCT, fanning and accelerating the rtl is SOP to carve turns.

Currently, my operating point is:

An rtl can fan to include internals that are of the same sentiment as the start of the trend segment. Opposite sentiment with a close that XO’s the rtl, for me is a solid BO,T1. During debriefing if a BM,rev occurs on the next bar, I’m looking to see if this segment was better ID’d as an EE.

The index card drill combined with the Modrian is providing some insight on piecing together trend segments, turns and trend types.

With these recent discussions, there is a refinement that is happening that is quite pleasing. Thanks to everyone for participating!

 

[Sprout]

As we know, B-band and examples of bands-beyond (valid or not), as well as corresponding explanatory materials is minimal.

Sorry to reiterate already presented material, but it is necessary to ensure we stay focused on what the current difficulties are...

A-band, as far as it's boundaries and it's activation, I am sure, we are clear on. Moving on...

B-band as described above is activated in conjunction with a VTP result of T2P.
And here the "confusion" begins... we are not discussing the B-band EE's at this stage.

A VTP measurement of a "first" T2P comes after a P2.
For a "first" T2P to be ID'd, volume is required to be > T1. Volume of < T1 "kiils" a T2P ID.

Even though a T2P is "killed" it still shows itself on the VTP handwritten log.
The OOE of events show on a log and the current Event logged is transformed into an EE if it qualifies as such. The EE's are LVBO's and HVBO's.

Lacking any prior reference this is what I would infer notT2P is.



Lets look at next, following a T2P: there are 3 possibilities for next following a T2P....
Another T2P, a T2F or an EE, exactly which EE, we are not there, we are looking at next.

There is also the possibility of 'Wait'. The way I see it is that wait is wait, the T2P is a repeat, T2F is 'Next' and if Volume is at an extreme such as a LVBO or HVBO then it is assigned an EE.



A next T2P is required to be >= the previous T2P. With B-band active as of the "first" T2P, the upper limit for a next T2P is P2. The lower limit for a next T2P is the first (or previous) T2P.

If the lower limit is not reached, only T2F or an EE is possible. VTP measurement of a "first" T2F ID, comes after a T2P, and volume is required to be > T1. Volume of < T1 "kills" a T2F ID.

Yes AND even though a T2F is "killed" it still shows itself on the VTP handwritten log. The OOE of events show on a log and the current Event logged is transformed into an EE if it qualifies as such. A "killed" T2F is what I would infer a notT2F would be.


Lets look at a few EE's now...
If a "first" T2P is killed it is because volume is < T1. Clearly an Ab EE. B-band is not even active.
If a "next" T2P is killed it is because volume is less than the first (or previous) T2P. This is NOT an EE, as a first T2F is possible. Here lives confusion. B-band is active.

VTP allows T2F after T2P or T2F. B-band has a lower limit of T2P, --BUT-- T2F **is** lower volume than T2P. If a B-band EE is applied, a sequence will NEVER be allowed to progress beyond T2P!! Ab or maybe Aa EE ( NB: there is a suble diffence (besides P1 placement) between Aa and Ba) are explanatory sequence resets imo.

In this sequence if P2>P1, then after T2P is logged, Ba's upper limit is P2, it's lower limit is T2P. In this case, yes, no progression to a repeat of T2P, no possibility of PP1c.

In this sequence if P2<P1, then after T2P is logged, a repeat of T2P is possible as well as a path to PP1c.
Bc's upper limit is P1, it's lower limit is P2.
T2P's can manifest with lower limit T2P and upper limit P2.

What you have in bold is the logic bump that I was referring to in a prior post.



If a "first" T2F is killed, it is because volume is < T1.
The argument can be made this is an Ab EE.

Yes, with Jack's recent quote of once a band is activated it stays activated until another band deactivates any overlap.


It could also be argued it is a B-band EE which are based on ID'd peaks rather than lower limits.

Yes AND taking into consideration the distinct paths caused by P2 being above or below P1.


Where Im at..
The B-band EE Ba has 2 quite different defines. One definition on the handwritten B through K bands sheet and another definition on the explanatory B-band EE's post from Jack, I believe from the butt thread but Im not sure about that. In any case, I believe the butt thread post is more current and I accept that Ba definition over the older Ba definition on the B through K bands sheet. If you read closely, you will see the Bc definitions are the same however. The line "Bc is not seen" adds further confusion since Bc is included on the top portion of modrian table set B, C, and D.

Ba, Bc definitions


Let me now add more spice... T2F activates C-band. C-band has only one EE. Previously, I posted a snip from Jack regarding n+1 and the C-band. I mentioned how the mixed tense of his words was concerning. This concern is confirmed IMO. Just saying.

Yes AND C band creates limits for F band to be "outside of" and have G band "within"

This is the end of the non-Dom traverse of the trend segment and beginning of the Dom traverse at pt3 of price which is the Secondary Band. In a normative Set C trend, it's the b2b2r2b or r2r2b2r.


Bands F, G, H and K all have references to T2P and/or T2F in very specific, yet to be understood ways.

n+1 does not come into being until G band activates. This is where the third peak of price can either pass or fail (P3P, P3F)

G band definition



Writing code brings these matters to light.

Comments within quoted text.

 

[tiddlywinks]

Frankly @Sprout , I don't understand much of your "response". I will reply to the few items that I do.

>> There is also the possibility of 'Wait'.
Really??? I'm not a beginner with this stuff. Get off your horse! Inclusion or not of a "wait" possibility in the discussion has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion.

>> Ba, Bc definitions
Yes, I have already superseded the hand written B through K band sheet with those posted band definitions from the ET threads. They are more current. Thusfar, in my work, Ba EE has been shown to have different definitions between the 2 sources.

>> n+1 does not come into being until G band activates. This is where the third peak of price can either pass or fail (P3P, P3F)

Jack said differently... Post #601, in this thread.
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/on-10-case-geometry-and-beyond.310880/page-61#post-4692060

Happy to help in whatever way I may have done so.

 

[Sprout]

Frankly @Sprout , I don't understand much of your "response". I will reply to the few items that I do.

>> There is also the possibility of 'Wait'.
Really??? I'm not a beginner with this stuff. Get off your horse! Inclusion or not of a "wait" possibility in the discussion has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion.

>> Ba, Bc definitions
Yes, I have already superseded the hand written B through K band sheet with those posted band definitions from the ET threads. They are more current. Thusfar, in my work, Ba EE has been shown to have different definitions between the 2 sources.

>> n+1 does not come into being until G band activates. This is where the third peak of price can either pass or fail (P3P, P3F)

Jack said differently... Post #601, in this thread.
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/on-10-case-geometry-and-beyond.310880/page-61#post-4692060

Happy to help in whatever way I may have done so.

Not sure why you're taking it personally, it's just my way of establishing a clear record for those following the path. You're a great help! It's these type of discussions that create clarity.

There is a reason why Jack promoted the use of a hand written log, unless one has gone through the process, it's not really fair to oneself to discount it. Annotating a chart is not the same thing. There are things in the paper log that occur that do not on an annotated chart.