On 10-case geometry and beyond

[sss12]

I appreciate the request. If you want live calls this thread is more aligned with your desire.

It's a bit of a dilemma - folks whom share their trades but not their method or others whom share their method but not their trades.

I've witnessed countless threads that get derailed from folks who want 'proof'. From my pov, it shifts the focus and attracts unwanted attention. I'm not a guru, do not claim to be, nor desire any followers, nor charge any money. I'm just an ordinary guy, who got to work with diligent purposeful learning to create a spectrum of differentiation in my mind. I'm willing to share just as countless others before me have with those willing to do the work. It's changed my life.
Doing the work is the only way to give yourself true 'proof'. Maybe some others might be more comfortable with sharing their trades and p&l and grant your request.

In life, giving what you want is a good start.

I suppose in some minds, this is a child's playground of theory.

That's perfect in so many ways - Jack always mentioned 5th graders with crayon can learn quickly what others dismiss.

@Sprout.
Thank you for the response.

I may not have been too elegant In my post of "what trade did you execute" for which I apologize, I know you have put a lot of time into expressing your concepts on this forum.

What I was trying to ask ,is in general term, what vehicle and structure of a trade do you use to transfer your methodology into practice ?

BTW..I get the playground reference.

 

[stepan7]

@Sprout.
Thank you for the response.

I may not have been too elegant In my post of "what trade did you execute" for which I apologize, I know you have put a lot of time into expressing your concepts on this forum.

What I was trying to ask ,is in general term, what vehicle and structure of a trade do you use to transfer your methodology into practice ?

BTW..I get the playground reference.

Trade example executed by Spydertrader.

It's from old ET thread "Fatigue".

It's good idea to read that "Fatugue" thread.

St.

 

[Sprout]

@Sprout.
Thank you for the response.

I may not have been too elegant In my post of "what trade did you execute" for which I apologize, I know you have put a lot of time into expressing your concepts on this forum.

What I was trying to ask ,is in general term, what vehicle and structure of a trade do you use to transfer your methodology into practice ?

BTW..I get the playground reference.

ES 5m, my current focus is migrating from enter/exit to hold & reverse.

I wish I could take credit, however the concepts are my interpretation of Jack Hershey's work, Spydertrader's and all whom participated in the various discussions/threads as well as the current roster of interested participants.

 

[Sprout]

TradingView Volume is not usable.

Annotating non-futures instruments, daily or not, is in your hands.

The difficulty is that that's bats data. If you have a cqg broker, getting credentialed on TV for real-time data is highly discounted.

I do agree that the preponderance of the gaps in the QQQ's presents it's own unique challenges. I'd still be inclined to approach it with PVT vs SCT or RDBMS. Still, any of the approaches, is a fun exercise.

 

[NeedToLearn]

Tried it with NQ. Counting the overnight makes it so much smoother but how much relevance does it really have given low volume during the session?

 

[tiddlywinks]

The difficulty is that that's bats data. If you have a cqg broker, getting credentialed on TV for real-time data is highly discounted.

I do agree that the preponderance of the gaps in the QQQ's presents it's own unique challenges. I'd still be inclined to approach it with PVT vs SCT or RDBMS. Still, any of the approaches, is a fun exercise.

Yup. BATS data. Inconsistent and unreliable.
I have a CQG feed, also a Sierra feed. Even have TV as a platform option, but I have no interest in subscribing to equities, or TV-live.

Totally agree with you Sprout regarding PVT vs other approaches. Spyder mentioned many times he found equities much more difficult to work with. I will go on to add, slower time frames have a tilt towards art rather than (binary)science. And more pronounced with equities.

Its always fun!! Never know where a-ha will come from!!

Trade On!

 

[stepan7]

.... Spyder mentioned many times he found equities much more difficult to work with. ...

I don't recall it. What I recall are:
- Trading futures was no different than equities;
- Trading futures much easier because no need to do the home work.

It's all the same and boring - Volume drop - Volume rise. Price retreat - Price advance in the dominant direction. Until it reach FTT. Price cross RTL (B2B or R2R) and sequence continue in opposite direction.

 

[tiddlywinks]

I don't recall it. What I recall are:
- Trading futures was no different than equities;
- Trading futures much easier because no need to do the home work.

The blurbs are there. I'll make a mental note and post if/when/as I run across. Equities more difficult, and not preferred by Spyder.

 

[stepan7]

That gap will be hard to breach.

View attachment 184852

I doubt @Simples much interested in non-deGaped charts, so it's my last.

QQQ: nothing excited to report about, Price is Up with HH and HL - which is good thing, however with bad sign - Very Low Volume.

@Simples Q for you - WMCN?

 

[Simples]

I doubt @Simples much interested in non-deGaped charts, so it's my last.

QQQ: nothing excited to report about, Price is Up with HH and HL - which is good thing, however with bad sign - Very Low Volume.

@Simples Q for you - WMCN?

View attachment 184892

There'll be higher volume after this

I never said I was not not uninterested in non-degapped charts...