You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Question for Grob/Hershey...
- Thread starter makosgu
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Perspective C is what I inferred from prior discussions. I don't believe there was ever a definition given for it. In any case, there is a place in my monitoring for Perspective C, which I do on the 1m chart although rarely. Some old posts of my monitoring layout show how I've set it up, I believe.
Quote from Dantheman:
Look at my diagram that i posted. i believe your previous APA supercedes the IF 2 in many cases...this turns a loser into a wash reverse.
my approach is supported in the sexy thread, jack details one of the 'ugly bar situations' that way...although he doesn't say that is what he did exactly.
i guess i'm infering it.
Not sure exactly what you mean here. I'll take a closer look later in the day.
I did see in your previous post with your rules that you would apply APA to bars other than entry bars. I thought I had read in that thread Jack saying that APA applied only to the entry bar but I may be mistaken. I'll make another pass later. Thanks.
ya he did say that, but i don't think that's what he did. my conjecture.
it also helped me piece together his excel sheet for ym15 min...august of '03...the 30 points stuff.
previously, i couldn't figure out how in the heck he made 30 points all of the days but 1. now i see it. pretty cool.
it also helped me piece together his excel sheet for ym15 min...august of '03...the 30 points stuff.
previously, i couldn't figure out how in the heck he made 30 points all of the days but 1. now i see it. pretty cool.
Coarse, med, fine, and etc. are very important in tandem. I wouldn't consider a decision without an iterative focus starting from a relatively broad context.Quote from icarus618:
Well I guess I share in the responsibility for responses like this.
Would it be asking too much to read the entire sentence from which you took that snippet you quoted in your post? That way there would be some chance to see that I was commenting on the necessity of coarse monitoring and pointing out the benefits vis-a-vis SCT on A DAY LIKE YESTERDAY rather than making a statement that coarse monitoring is to be preferred over SCT or questioning the usefulness of SCT. I'm interested in learning more about SCT, hence my post.
If I come off a bit cranky, don't take it the wrong way, I'm really a sweetheart with my usual hours of sleep. Cheers.
For the last year + 1/2, all of my efforts have been in this line of thought (what I spoke of in my recent post). I've studied a lot about mathematics and about programming; and a lot of *jack jibber. It's my contention that to truly take advantage of expert *jack style of trading, this would be required. I think that most mistake his methods for being (what is referred to by the community as) discretionary trading. Market description is fractal, and I happen to apply everything to a very refined scale.
I wish that I could discuss my thoughts without possibly infringing upon, not only the effort that I believe *jack want's people to make (that read his babble), but also the generous effort he has contributed to relay it to anyone willing to work at interpreting it. I don't have definitive answers. No. But, a hell of alot of translative conjecture sure makes sense to me in the contexts I associate them in. This too is an iterative process.
kt
Quote from Stalker:
...
How about the rest of you, do you have any thoughts about dom, something you´ve noticed? Really interested to hear if someone has found it consistently usefull in any way.
/Stalker
I will try and put together my thoughts on this in DETAIL! The knowledge I had worked out (couple of months and notebooks of doodling) is true. It operates very quickly and requires some sort of bandpass filter (ie. removing higher frequency signals). It might take a few days to put such a post together.
MAK!
Quote from icarus618:
If I understand what you are saying, you raise an interesting point about whether we can reach a super efficiency by going to and staying on DOM (which I take to mean Bbid/Bask only) and disregarding bar to bar comparisons. To me, this is going beyond even Perspective C (bar to bar comparison of faster bars within the bar), to which my gut says is a tough path to go down in search of better performance, at least with respect to the ES. My experience tells me that coarse monitoring is always essential, even for an RHR method such as SCT, and on days like today--neither a W nor M--how much more can SCT extract over sitting in the tape on the slower fractal? Nonetheless, I am interested in hearing more details about what you are saying, and do realize that I may be overly restricting what I read from you.
EXCELLENT POST. I have done this (several days) with astonishing precision and one caveat. As Grob has shown in person, there is a personal efficacy (sp???) limit as to how much data can be handled/processed by our own EQ/IQ. Grob admits that he does the processing uncosciously and automatically (sports memory) where as presumably alot of us work hard on being conscious of all that is going on. Kind of like learning to drive stick. The first few times, you THINK, clutch->shift->release clutch->accelarate. A few laps of doing this repeatedly and soon it is an uncoscious automatic thing, (ie. you just do it and don't think it through). Many of us are spending alot of time thinking things through and it is uber sensitive because EQ is strongly coupled with the investment that is on the line.
Regarding the personal efficacy, there is a curve between one's personal efficacy (skill) and extrapolation of what the market is always/continually delivering. It is agreeable that the greatest computer is the one between the lobes. My own slant is that at times I am error prone in monitoring (ie. data being corrupted somewhere in the input - misread, misinterpreted, read at the wrong time). So alternatively, I was forced to look at the markets components individually, diagram their unique states and vectorize each independent variable and sort out the dynamics and then work out what is what with regards to movement up/down/flat. The work was tedious and I only have the individual components P, V, BSize/ASize (volume at Bid, volume at Ask), DOM (ie. depths of BSize/ASize), Str/Squ (leading/lagging pairs), and beyond that is the 4 components contrasted against the leader/lagger. With V alone, I had attained a computer efficiency of 7x on several days (forward testing with real money). I stopped the forward test since the commission was a killer at $5/rt/contract (POS). Curious, are there commission structures in which it's per execution as opposed to per contract and execution?
I agree that the DOM is frequent action at least once every 2-4 mins. Presumably, your comments mention bbid/bask because it is what is on our sweep charts (ie. 2pair and translation) which can be seen on either a bar chart or the DOM. Personally, I watch 2 pairs on a range bar set to a range increment of .25. On my other machine, I can pop up a pic of it. The Sexy Idea thread comments is nowhere on our sweep charts and required some between the lines processing since it has to do with the monitoring of the minority on the T&S DOM. The minority is an aspect of what there is currently a lack of (longs or shorts), hence BSize/ASize. In other words, that which is rare is worth more. Since we only have 2 items (longs vs shorts), whichever of the 2 is rare is worth more. I call it the "Minority Report". That is where the immediate right side of the market is ALWAYS! The subtlety is whether anyone wants the rare item. Sure, I might have the only purple Schwin bike on the planet but if no one wants it, its of no value. To be more specific, if Longs are rare, but all incoming orders are for shorts, then the minority is a bit fuzzy. Hence the caveat that BVol/AVol corroborate their respective BSize/ASize inventory... The minority is a combo of what is currently being accumulated (PRV long/shorts) in addition to the availability of longs/shorts. This is super micro activity and is true for any traded instrument.
The simplest monitoring is PRV BVol vs BSize (DN) and PRV AVol vs ASize (UP). I hate to spread out the thread's focus to things I'm interested in so I have to refrain from scattering so many ideas in the interest of focusing on one thing at a time. It is one reason I will pencil in some 1-on-1 time.
MAK!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.