On 10-case geometry and beyond
- Thread starter Simples
- Start date
OB turn matrix
Consider OB's as an end or as an in-betweener. We are just considering ends at the moment. As an end, then it's also a new beginning. This is a turn. The turns have a sequence. C-turns are the easiest to see, where Dominance of one trend fails to begin Dominance in the next trend.
By putting an OB at n, we can consider the larger context of where it came from and where it is going to.
Starting at the upper right hand corner of the OB long to short page with the C - C turn. The turn at n links a long trend segment to a short trend segment.
To see the possibilities from here, look at the OB short to long page top row. From C the next possible turns are C or A.
So by using the two sheets one can go back and forth and see the sequences of turn possibilities.
Consider OB's as an end or as an in-betweener. We are just considering ends at the moment. As an end, then it's also a new beginning. This is a turn. The turns have a sequence. C-turns are the easiest to see, where Dominance of one trend fails to begin Dominance in the next trend.
By putting an OB at n, we can consider the larger context of where it came from and where it is going to.
Starting at the upper right hand corner of the OB long to short page with the C - C turn. The turn at n links a long trend segment to a short trend segment.
To see the possibilities from here, look at the OB short to long page top row. From C the next possible turns are C or A.
So by using the two sheets one can go back and forth and see the sequences of turn possibilities.
Last edited:
OB intrabar
This series is just the long series. One can deduce the short series.
Here we have OB's that start as IB's and those that do not.
From there we have continue or change. When change does occur the unilateral legs of the OB reverse.
Where is the point on the bar where this occurs?
How is the initial sentiment different from the ending sentiment?
How does putting these bars in the position of n in the prior post determine context? How does context change when a reversal of a reversal occurs within an OB?
This series is just the long series. One can deduce the short series.
Here we have OB's that start as IB's and those that do not.
From there we have continue or change. When change does occur the unilateral legs of the OB reverse.
Where is the point on the bar where this occurs?
How is the initial sentiment different from the ending sentiment?
How does putting these bars in the position of n in the prior post determine context? How does context change when a reversal of a reversal occurs within an OB?
Last edited:
Clearly @Sprout, you've done more "study" on the subject of JH methodology than I.
I am not knowledgeable enough (or smart enough) to dispel or corroborate your work.
What I do know is how short term trading, as measured in single-digit minutes, works. LTCM blew up not because Black-Scholes was "bad" or "wrong", but rather because the math geniuses did not understand trading and how world finance was intertwined. Similar circumstance surrounds many well known blowups... not faulty analysis(necessarily), but rather how that analysis was absorbed, dispersed, and acted upon within the marketplace.
So as to the OB question... what determines the two levels of an OB, the sequence in which the OB has appeared, or the volume of the OB itself? For me, for now, the answer is the sequence in which the OB has appeared. I choose to remain a trader. I am not smart enough to be anything else.
I am not knowledgeable enough (or smart enough) to dispel or corroborate your work.
What I do know is how short term trading, as measured in single-digit minutes, works. LTCM blew up not because Black-Scholes was "bad" or "wrong", but rather because the math geniuses did not understand trading and how world finance was intertwined. Similar circumstance surrounds many well known blowups... not faulty analysis(necessarily), but rather how that analysis was absorbed, dispersed, and acted upon within the marketplace.
So as to the OB question... what determines the two levels of an OB, the sequence in which the OB has appeared, or the volume of the OB itself? For me, for now, the answer is the sequence in which the OB has appeared. I choose to remain a trader. I am not smart enough to be anything else.
What I had before I went to lunch. I feel like there are way too many FS being activated so I'm suspicious of my own log today but this is what I had.
@tiddlywinks, I consider all of us here engaged in the method to be a circle of peers. I appreciate the discussion and your pov.
SOP is that the two levels are determined by the sequence.
The caveat is when OB's are near the rtl. When the bar straddles the rtl, that's when how the OB builds comes into play. Lot's of times the top row is a FS. As a FS then it takes precedence over PP4. Sometimes it's becomes a not FS. A not FS comes after a FS (it was a FS until it wasn't).
Whether or not to ID the trough of the PP4 as an additional turn (an unusual 2 turns on an OB) is dependent on the OB 3 legs sheet.
If you refer to The Pattern previous posted, problem areas are the two circled intersections. It's the binary output of BO or FBO as a non-Dom traverse XO a rtl with increasing volume to become Dominant. The transition of b2b or r2r actually has a collapsed non-Dom region between the two Dominate zones.
At the b2b circled intersection, price could have honored the prior trend's rtl. A break off this traverse long from pt1 to pt2 can be either a c turn or a turn. Refer to the OB long to short reference sheet.
The whole day logged. I tried my best lol. So many FS events. SCT Trend lines were clear today though despite the small range.
I'm still pulling my hair out about the trend types. I also realized I don't understand how to get the 'senti' column for each bar... I tried adding turn types and trend sets in the attached log but I definitely feel confused