[POLL] Are Bullish and Bearish Day Trading patterns Unique OR Similar ?

[rajesheck]

Charts are a result of math too

Chart is result of trading activity, not maths. The graphical representation on the chart is not maths.

Circles, ellipse, rectangle, triangle, etc are mathematical representations.

Trading chart is psychological representation.

Treating a trading chart as a mathematical representation is like swimming with bicycling skill instead of swimming skill. Possible, yet inefficienct.

Don't believe me. Ask a qualified statistician or mathematician. He will tell that trading chart is not mathematical representation.

Just because an art piece is rectangular in size we cannot say it is just maths. Is Monalisa art just maths ? Just because it is rectangular with length and breath.

If you are comfortable with maths model its your personal thing. But you cannot change an art into maths. We definitely wont buy it either.

 

[Mtrader]

Chart is result of trading activity,

As soon as you use data, you use math. Data exists of numbers. Numbers are math.
Paintings are psychological representations.

What do you see on your charts? Volume, open, high, low,close...? All numbers.

Show me a picture of a trading chart. Maybe we don't speak about the same thing.

I googled "trading charts" this was the result:

 

[rajesheck]

As soon as you use data, you use math. Data exists of numbers. Numbers are math.
Paintings are psychological representations.

What do you see on your charts? Volume, open, high, low,close...? All numbers.

Show me a picture of a trading chart. Maybe we don't speak about the same thing.

I googled "trading charts" this was the result:

View attachment 170952

Everyone have to agree that there are numbers everywhere on the chart.

My point is each candle is unique and relationship between adjuscent candles are unique. It is not a particular mathematical series. (eg. geometric series)

We can say in one hour the price moved X%. That is maths.

How the candles were arranged on the chart in that one hour is a psychological representation.

The chart represents both maths and psychology. What you wish to see is upto you.

 

[volpri]

I agree that chart reading is subjective and maths is objective.

this i agree with.

My point is trading is a demand supply game of psychology. An art. Chart reading is an art of reading the pulse of mass.

are you double dog sure of this?

Maths can also read the pulse. But the question is how efficient it is ? Is it as efficient as chart reading ?

Durn..does this mean i gotta stick to interpreting art? I was hoping to go back to math.

Maths is pure science and objective. Market pulse is definitely not objective. It is mass psychology. And psychology is purely subjective. Is this not a clear mismatch in applying maths to understand market ?

I thought charts represented movement of price which takes place in ticks which IS math. Patterns aka triangles..wedges ad nauseum..i am tired of looking for them and at them....actually is a more a representation of "how" the math (ticks) happended over TIME. To me that (the patterns) would be the psychological representation of the market participants, not the bars. But i could be wrong. I have been known to be wrong. Said patterns are what i look to interpret and draw conclusions from. It is ALOT of darn work...requires intense focus and concentration..can pan out or fail (that is why people say they are only about 50% accurate) BUT what people FAIL to interpret is when a patterns fails that failure in itself is another interpretation with implications for price movement. Its like this. If i am supposed to go 3 miles to winn dixie grocery story for my beloved wife but instead i decide to go to walmarts grocery section that is say 28 miles away to get the same item then this has implicit implications to achieve the same PT (item) namely, gas wear and tear and TIME greater risk of accident...etc as one is only at risk when on the road (in the market) so to speak. .SO when I fail to go to Winn Dixie like I am supposed to (per wife) then i have to go somewhere else. And that going to somewhere else carries new implicit implications. So when a pattern fails in the chart that in itself carries new info that has to be interpreted. It gets worse! You can actually have a failed pattern fail! That carries enormous implications for price movement. Some people just call it whipsawing! ROFLMAO. See it is more complicated to interpret art than most think. I am getting too old. I just want it to be more simple. Could you share a simpler way? It doesn't look like Mtrader is in the sharing mood.

If maths can understand market pulse then show me one business in the world which has automated its business decisions.

well i don't know about this one. I have heard it said all things are just vibrations. And I suppose vibrations can be measured mathematically.

 

[rajesheck]

this i agree with.

are you double dog sure of this?

Durn..does this mean i gotta stick to interpreting art? I was hoping to go back to math.

I thought charts represented movement of price which takes place in ticks which IS math. Patterns aka triangles..wedges ad nauseum..i am tired of looking for them and at them....actually is a more a representation of "how" the math (ticks) happended over TIME. To me that (the patterns) would be the psychological representation of the market participants, not the bars. But i could be wrong. I have been known to be wrong. Said patterns are what i look to interpret and draw conclusions from. It is ALOT of darn work...requires intense focus and concentration..can pan out or fail (that is why people say they are only about 50% accurate) BUT what people FAIL to interpret is when a patterns fails that failure in itself is another interpretation with implications for price movement. Its like this. If i am supposed to go 3 miles to winn dixie grocery story for my beloved wife but instead i decide to go to walmarts grocery section that is say 28 miles away to get the same item then this has implicit implications to achieve the same PT (item) namely, gas wear and tear and TIME greater risk of accident...etc as one is only at risk when on the road (in the market) so to speak. .SO when I fail to go to Winn Dixie like I am supposed to (per wife) then i have to go somewhere else. And that going to somewhere else carries new implicit implications. So when a pattern fails in the chart that in itself carries new info that has to be interpreted. It gets worse! You can actually have a failed pattern fail! That carries enormous implications for price movement. Some people just call it whipsawing! ROFLMAO. See it is more complicated to interpret art than most think. I am getting too old. I just want it to be more simple. Could you share a simpler way? It doesn't look like Mtrader is in the sharing mood.

well i don't know about this one. I have heard it said all things are just vibrations. And I suppose vibrations can be measured mathematically.

This is the simple version of chart reading. Basically it is momentum trading strategy, which means physics on your chart. So its a blend of science and art.

https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/principle-based-day-trading-strategies.304974/

This is my regular thread :
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/day-trading-basics.305348/

 

[volpri]

I read a lot about the human brain and more specific about the deficiency of it. And I never read any books about indicators, point and figures, and all other free stuff that never works, as it would have spoiled the way I think.

mmm...i wouldn't say NEVER works.

I knew a fund in London that only accepted people that never traded before but had the good basic qualifications to become a trader. They gave them the education they were supposed to have (according to the fund). And they did not have to deprogram them before starting, to get all the wrong garbage out of his head. Many times “old knowledge” blocks the way to “new knowledge” as it will always pops up when you start to think. Computers can be reset quickly, human brains need much more time. If a person is struggling a long time with an unsolvable problem he takes a time out to empty his head and starts fresh again. A “human reset”. The most common problem after that is that he starts to think again the same way he did before. This will block any new insight or different approach to solve the problem.

yes. Paradigm shifts are unlike computer resets. It is impossible to flip a switch on the brain and effect a paradigm shift. You have to write a new program ...so to speak..and and get it in the machine from an external source..floppy disk..memory stick...cd..etc. Some computers (aka as brain) cannot handle the new info and shall i say "lock up". Happens to people quite often. I am in the training business. In another field not trading (thank goodness). I have had people get so mad they walk out. Others take copious notes. But that is good. That means I am reaching home. That means i am hitting a nerve. IF I can convince them of the error of their ways they many times become some of the most productive. Those that yawn and sleep in a training...well i know i am wasting my time with them. They will never do didley squat. In training it is easy to tell when you are engaging people. When there is a meeting of the minds.

Did you never have the following situation:

You had a very difficult mathematical problem to solve, but at the end you see that the outcome is wrong. So you start to check, step by step, trying to find the mistake you made. After checking numerous times you still are not able to see the error. Then you ask somebody else to check it and he finds quickly what the issue was. When he explains it to you, you don’t understand how it was possible to overlook the error. All this is caused by the fact that you already had old knowledge that was influencing your subconscious and resulted in becoming “blind” for parts of your calculations.

the old software clashes with the new and the computer freezes up and does NOTHING. Been there. Done that. Seen that a time or two.

Charts are a result of math too, so if math is not efficient, charts cannot be efficient too as they are a result of math. I measure efficiency in performance, not in visibility. Charts are a graphical representation of math. It was surprising for me that I don’t need volume, S/R,retracements, divergences, break outs,channels, etc… to come to good results. For my trading they are completely useless. I only use incoming ticks and time registration.

darn if you ain't trying to give me a paradigm shift.....you say ...completely useless?? Now that is a hyperbole! But you make your point. Ok two bars side by side. Same height. Same width. Same color. This equals same visibility. You see it. I see it. Harry sees it. BUT the manner in which each bar was formed is via ticks across time. That is measureable and is performance. Sama bar. Sama color. Sama size, different performance. But same final result? Or is it? Does the manner in which what is visible was formed have anything to do with future probability of further quality (strenght) of future movement ???[/QUOTE]

Market pulse and psychology can be made objective, and should be. Because subjective means unreliable and unpredictable. For trading you need reliable things. That’s why most people have difficulties to have more than 50% of winning trades. Reliability is missing. The real challenge is: what do you need, how should you use it , to make a mathematical model that can be traded? Most people have no clue where to start. And as there are millions of different approaches and possibilities, you need years to find out which way to go. And even then most are not successful.

unreliable and unpredictable? No so sure about that. Price in a range will have B.O.'s Fail and price goes right back into the range about 70% to 80% of the time. Sama thing with channels. B.o.'s on either side fail most of the time. Eventually one succeeds. I shall attach a picture in another post. Probability is only 40% to 60% that any given trade will work (given sl ..pt..parameters..ad nauseum) and when one takes the whole context in play. So, a short at the top of a range may have a good chance of going ones way but as time goes by that chance grows smaller. Sooner or later it will break out. As far as the individual trade. It may or may not work (has a 40% to 60% chance) depending on the probability of reaching your Sl and PT. I would think that although math is relentless and exact, probability must also enters into the equation. Just because price moved X distance IN X amount of time (from one number to another number over times) does not mean it always continue the NEXT the subsequent movement with the same force OR velocity EVERY time. So, even within a math context (in which the math takes place) probability of success is implied?? Or am i wrong? If it weren't so no stoplosses would be needed. Just get the math right. It will always work out 100% of the time. I don't think so. But i could be wrong!

That’s a good try! But I don’t think I will show you the one I know.

i just knew with 100% probability that you not shucking the whole ear of corn. Such extreme shucking was very very low probability. You have dished out a few grains but not enough to have some cream corn.

 

[volpri]

This is the simple version of chart reading. Basically it is momentum trading strategy, which means physics on your chart. So its a blend of science and art.

https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/principle-based-day-trading-strategies.304974/

This is my regular thread :
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/day-trading-basics.305348/

thanks i will make haste and check it out as time permits.

 

[volpri]

Here is my promised chart showing range behaviour as promised in my post #56. So many attempts at b.o. So many failures. So many opportunities to make $$$.$$$ Short and Long. I like making money don't you?? I think in this chart i only traded the b.o. action. Don't remember why. Could be i didn't begin watching market to just before B.O. Now channels have the same dynamics (failures to B.O. top and bottom sides) EXCEPT they usually evolve into a trading range if they do or don't have a BO. Plus the market is ALWAYS in a channel. So the market can even be in a channel...a range..a successful BO ..a failed B.O. a down trend. An up trend. A triangle.. a wedge..ALL AT THE SAME TIME I.E. SIMULTANEOUSLY. SEE it IS complicated. LOL ..ROFLO I speak the truth. Check it out. Look at many many charts and the truth will dawn. Now if Mtrader will share the whole caboose I can stop this pattern stuff. But I wouldn't hold my breath. No sir ree bob! Mtrader is gonna hold his secrets. Don't know why. It won't hurt his trading to spill the beans. He could write a book and give it away for free. Won't hurt his bottom line abit as far as trading profits go. Think about it Mtrader! What took you 10 years and 300k to learn you could share for FREE!

 

[Mtrader]

My point is each candle is unique and relationship between adjuscent candles are unique. It is not a particular mathematical series. (eg. geometric series)

A candle is a graphical representation of series of numbers within a timeframe following specific rules (the definition of a candle formation). So it is a pure mathematical presentation of tick data and the time registration of the data coming in. You interpret the definition of "particular mathematical serie" much too narrow.
The fact whether something is a "particular mathematical serie" or not depends on the qualifications of the person who is analyzing it. Sometimes it is, but most don't see the valid information. It can also be that there is no valid information at all.
There is a double difficulty: knowing if there is valid information, and second: finding it.

 

[Mtrader]

mmm...i wouldn't say NEVER works.

If it works every now and then or even less, then it is luck. You cannot consider it as "working". "Working" for me means at least 65% of winning signals and average win at least twice the average loss.
Even a clock that is not working is for 100% on time twice a day.

darn if you ain't trying to give me a paradigm shift.....you say ...completely useless??

small correction, I should have added: FOR ME.
I sometimes forget that I should see thing not only from my own position, but on the other hand : that's the best real experience I have.

Does the manner in which what is visible was formed have anything to do with future probability of further quality (strenght) of future movement ???

Difficult one.

1. first: visibility can be different for you and for me. So we can see different things and also at a different time.
2. second: because of the previous remark the probablity that we speak about the same thing is practically zero. So future probability of further quality (strenght) of future movement will be most probably complete different.

Best is to work with an example. It is purely hypothetical and manipulated just to show what I mean. So has nothing to do with reality:

• Your system is going long or short when 2 different MA's cross.
• My system is going long or short when 2 different stochastics cross.
• Your system has a probability of 67% to end profitable.
• My system has a probability of 55% to end profitable.

So what and when you see it, is completely different from what and when I see something. On top of that probability is different too.
In this situation I don't understand how to answer to your question. We see different things at different times with different probabilities???

What took you 10 years and 300k to learn you could share for FREE!

I never found anybody who wanted to take part of my losses when I was in search for the "wholy grail".
A dozen people were interested, but when they had to invest nobody was interested anymore. Why would they if everywhere you read that 99,9% lose? Nobody wanted to invest, but if it ever would work they were "interested". And now I should play Santa Claus?
On top of that sharing would damage my trading as everybody who would have a copy of the system would enter at the same time as me and would reduce the volume available for me. Why should I create FOR FREE competitors that can make my life difficult? I prefer an easy life.