I find Spydertrader's example very important: we don't trade ES using YM as a proxy, we use YM as a leading indicator "at (ES') points of change". This also means that there'll be YM changes that won't materialize in ES changes; if for nothing else, because YM's scale is 2.5 times finer than ES'.
Spydertrader's Jack Hershey Futures Trading Journal
- Thread starter Spydertrader
- Start date
- Status
David,
I would not have taken this long trade (from a neutral perspective) at all because of the following reasons:
1. There's no FTT or sign of FTT on YM. We see a bar with large shadow on the bottom + an inside bar forming. No big deal. We need additional signals. YM doesn't show it.
2. YM shows a down tape, not a down channel (on this fractal) so I would expect price to try to break out of the tape and then form a pt3 down or in fact break out and form a point 3 down later on. This tape tells me 1,2 and we need 3 now. That's the sequence, not 1,2 FTT. Taking this FTT would be far too early.
That would be my channel because I trade channels and not tapes. The least we need is a channel on YM. Sometimes I trade ES tapes but only if YM already shows a channel. Had I taken this long trade then I would have reversed again at 15:26:28 when YM failed to break the tape. Had I been short then yes, I might have exited at the FTT but would have gone short again at 15:26:28.
Even if you consider this tape a channel (YM + ES 2 bars) which of course is true on a smaller fractal then it's a very narrow one. I know I have to be very careful on very narrow channels with respect to double bottom and top FTT's. You just have to give price more breathing room especially because YM does not even show a channel yet which in general occurs on YM before it occurs on ES because of the fractal.
3. Price did not make a lower low (YM + ES). I know this is not a requirement but I find that kind of FTT's very reliable but I don't see it. Let's first break new ground and how price and volume behave there.
regards,
Ivo
Looking back on my charts I have posted I have come to realize that I have been annotating very sloppy.
I see that I have put in tapes in areas, then leave them out in others , because I have them in my mind , but you cannot see that when I post.
Also , leaving out the tapes , can lead to a possible sloppy mistake , when a quick reference to where I am is needed.
I have left out gaussians also , because I see them in my mind.
Again , that does not help anyone looking at the chart, and more than anything , my own clear monitoring, that is used in the analysis , decision, and action.
So, I need to apply discipline to the very foundation, that I will use in the process of MADA.
I look forward to the continued learning . . .
Only on a stronger foundation.
I see that I have put in tapes in areas, then leave them out in others , because I have them in my mind , but you cannot see that when I post.
Also , leaving out the tapes , can lead to a possible sloppy mistake , when a quick reference to where I am is needed.
I have left out gaussians also , because I see them in my mind.
Again , that does not help anyone looking at the chart, and more than anything , my own clear monitoring, that is used in the analysis , decision, and action.
So, I need to apply discipline to the very foundation, that I will use in the process of MADA.
I look forward to the continued learning . . .
Only on a stronger foundation.
I posted the question after I read Gregor_S's very interesting post as it was already on my list of questions for Spydertrader.
Spyder has explained many times how he will take a smoke break, go outside, make a few calls while keeping an eye on the screen - even if he has a position on (I believe this last point is correct?). He's also shared how you methodically build up to trading larger size, how the market does not know if you are simming or have real money on the line. Jack describes the right state of concentration as "sitting forward" - not too laid back nor too hyper.
The whole approach Spyder has taken with this journal is to take arousal off the table, as much as possible. By getting us to observe the market without any money at stake we can remain detached (disinterested) as the price moves and as we learn the patterns, sequences and tools. Of course many jumped right in (against advice) and found themselves getting over-aroused and thus saw their performance suffer. We've recently seen a classic example of the deleterious effects on a person's ability to learn further - they have temporarily burned out due to over arousal. (The performance-arousal curve is well known, no need to expand on it in detail here.)
I thought Gregor's post was excellent. You really have to be in that kind of relaxed, disinterested state of mind to learn - let it wash over you, allow time to process what you learn with a lot of rest and recuperation. Don't force it, don't over train. Don't hold on too tight. Don't try to be right all the time.
Now, you can end up being too disinterested. It's not good if we come to a situation in the next 6 months where we have 20 contracts on and we need to reverse NOW, but instead we sit there doodling away on something else and say, "Gee, would you look at that reversal!".
At some point we need to get arousal back on the table. I think that comes later in the syllabus. I floated the question to see if people had strategies - your response was one such example.
My "trades" from this am. I'm not really trading, these are where I would have taken action. THe intent is to enter on pt3 and exit on RTL.
9:50 I missed this one, mostly because the idea that a retrace for a pt3 channel to form can occurr on only 3 ticks doesn't fit my understanding of pt3 channels.
12:20 Long @ 1447.50, inc PRV forming a pt3, out at 1446 on RTL break. Loss: 1.5 pt's
13:00 Short @ 1446. PRV was clearly increasing on downward price movement, the prior up channel was broken and a R2R was clear on ES and YM. Out at rtl break @ 1447.75. Loss 1.75pt.s.
These are the kind of trades I take. THey fit with what we've been taught almost to perfection. SOmehow I seem to stumble on these nice little losses exclusively
9:50 I missed this one, mostly because the idea that a retrace for a pt3 channel to form can occurr on only 3 ticks doesn't fit my understanding of pt3 channels.
12:20 Long @ 1447.50, inc PRV forming a pt3, out at 1446 on RTL break. Loss: 1.5 pt's
13:00 Short @ 1446. PRV was clearly increasing on downward price movement, the prior up channel was broken and a R2R was clear on ES and YM. Out at rtl break @ 1447.75. Loss 1.75pt.s.
These are the kind of trades I take. THey fit with what we've been taught almost to perfection. SOmehow I seem to stumble on these nice little losses exclusively
There is no use talking about it if you can't post a chart.Quote from bundlemaker:
My "trades" from this am. I'm not really trading, these are where I would have taken action. THe intent is to enter on pt3 and exit on RTL.
9:50 I missed this one, mostly because the idea that a retrace for a pt3 channel to form can occurr on only 3 ticks doesn't fit my understanding of pt3 channels.
12:20 Long @ 1447.50, inc PRV forming a pt3, out at 1446 on RTL break. Loss: 1.5 pt's
13:00 Short @ 1446. PRV was clearly increasing on downward price movement, the prior up channel was broken and a R2R was clear on ES and YM. Out at rtl break @ 1447.75. Loss 1.75pt.s.
These are the kind of trades I take. THey fit with what we've been taught almost to perfection. SOmehow I seem to stumble on these nice little losses exclusively
Your tapes and channels would have told you plenty.
Sorry Tums, thought I had posted it, apparently it didn't stick...
I've used words to describe my experience that perhaps simply don't convey what I'm attemtping to describe. If we are to use MADA then that's what we do. We can't decide to use MADA in one moment, and then just willy nilly decide to ignore it the next. It seems likely that I'm having an issue with understanding what is sufficient and what is not. THis is why I've gone back to ONLY ES price and volume. Now, all over the place people have stated that this is enought data to make money. So far I haven't experienced that as a possibility. I'm curious just how many trades in a row of 1 or 2 pt loss should be acceptable at this level. THat bit of information would put me in the right mindset. RIght now, I experience losses, and that transforms into a state of failure unless I could begin to understand a bunch of losses in a row are part of the game.
But doesn't that begin to smack of the casino paradigm? Not what we're supposed to be learning me thinks.
This is what it seems like is going on. I posted a chart with two potential trades. If someone would like to post their thought process AT THE TIME OF THE RED ARROWS (my entry) then I could respond by saying I'm an idiot, I missed that; or it might reveal exactly what I've been trying to explain for two weeks.
But doesn't that begin to smack of the casino paradigm? Not what we're supposed to be learning me thinks.
This is what it seems like is going on. I posted a chart with two potential trades. If someone would like to post their thought process AT THE TIME OF THE RED ARROWS (my entry) then I could respond by saying I'm an idiot, I missed that; or it might reveal exactly what I've been trying to explain for two weeks.
- Status