Well, I use certain objective levels from day to day, but the level I was discussing with you was what I would call a supply (resistance) level. Drawing levels has an element of subjectivity, but what I picked up from another skilled trader was that he would usually draw his levels using the closing price and not the wicks.
So, by early this week we had a fairly well defined supply level at 3720.
Just observe all those wicks which essentially could be interpreted as price being sold each time the market pops above that level. There's sellers there.
At the end of Wednesday - I'm sure many people got excited as it looked like we would finally have a successful breakout, but observe how that hourly candled ended up once again with a larger wick.
It's not uncommon that a breakout point is tested, but when we dropped back inside that range I interpreted that as the market reverting at least back to the mid range. And early warning of that breakout failing could be that there was no more momentum to the upside. Price just went sideways and finally started dropping.
So, when Thursday's RTH session opened bidless and pretty much fell from the opening I didn't see any reason to go long.
EDIT: And if anyone thinks this is hindsight analysis, I actually posted this in real-time just as Wednesday's RTH session closed:
"The drop at the Close makes you wary it could be a false breakout."
View attachment 296535
Yes, there is certainly logic in your vision.
And even in spite of the element of subjectivity, it all looks quite convincing.
Unfortunately, this approach cannot be fully formalized, so that it would be possible to create a trading algorithm on its basis and check it on the quotes history.
And psychologically it would be easier to trade when all actions are strictly regulated.
How do you set objectives in trading with such an analysis?
And do you limit losses? Or it all depends on the situation and your decisions on exiting a position are intuitive?




