@stephane:
When all you have seen are white swans in your life, you tend to think all swans are white. But there do exist black swans! Likewise, when all you know is to define trend by way of time-frames, then you think that is the only way to do it; otherwise, you would not have said cannot in:
Food for thought:
(a) A trader uses constant volume bars to trade. How does that trader define trend? Time-frame does not make sense to her, does it?
(b) A trader uses PnF charts to trade. How does that trader define trend? Here too, Time-frame does not make sense to her, does it?
So, if I were you, I could come back with this:
However, there is one catch with the above definition. How does a trader who trades based not on artificial splitting mechanism (as described above -- one based on Time, Volume, Retracement, or others splitting of bars) but purely on prints fit into the above definition? That trader would still need a Trend to trade, hence has to define one, doesn't he? Unfortunately, I fall in this last category, yet I do define trend, in a way that makes sense to me, based on PA derived from prints (without any artificial splitting mechanism), to guide me in my trading. And, no, I am not a scalper.
To each his own.
All the best.
Regards,
Monoid.
When all you have seen are white swans in your life, you tend to think all swans are white. But there do exist black swans! Likewise, when all you know is to define trend by way of time-frames, then you think that is the only way to do it; otherwise, you would not have said cannot in:
or must in:You cannot define a thrend without knowing which timeframe we are talking of. [emphasis added; sp. not corrected]
Therefore, you must defint which TF is your trading TF and which Tfs is important to define the trend. [emphasis added; sp. not corrected]
Food for thought:
(a) A trader uses constant volume bars to trade. How does that trader define trend? Time-frame does not make sense to her, does it?
(b) A trader uses PnF charts to trade. How does that trader define trend? Here too, Time-frame does not make sense to her, does it?
So, if I were you, I could come back with this:
A trend should be defined using two different parameters for the type of splitting algorithm used to generate a bar.
So, for a time based splitting of a bar, one could use a 1-hr and 5-mins as an example. For a volume based splitting of a bar, one could use 100 and 1000 as an example; similarly, for PnF one could use two different retrace values. I am sure there are many more splitting algorithms people use that I am not familiar.
However, there is one catch with the above definition. How does a trader who trades based not on artificial splitting mechanism (as described above -- one based on Time, Volume, Retracement, or others splitting of bars) but purely on prints fit into the above definition? That trader would still need a Trend to trade, hence has to define one, doesn't he? Unfortunately, I fall in this last category, yet I do define trend, in a way that makes sense to me, based on PA derived from prints (without any artificial splitting mechanism), to guide me in my trading. And, no, I am not a scalper.
To each his own.
All the best.
Regards,
Monoid.
Last edited:
[/quote]