Spydertrader's Jack Hershey Futures Trading Journal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote from spooz_trader1:

...
However, if I take a WWT point of view, if "things" appear that don't help build the latter-half of the B2R guassian (or appear out of sequence), either I've made a *flaw* in my analysis of a FTT or I'm encountering a Flaw. Is this correct?
...
More...
Makes sense. But If it hadn't been for this post: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1325891#post1325891 I would not have realized that the sequence was broken. Dropping volume is what I would be looking for after the FTT. But in this case that very sequence (dropped too much) that should have had me thinking WWT.

<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1325891>
 
Quote from EstebanUno:

Snip . . . It's not clear to me from the syllabus whether flaws are topical now or are being postponed until later. But I'd sure like to know more about them.
More...

Spydertrader said he would cover the flaws they show up. On several of his posted charts some are noted. I'm sure we'll get into more depth as the month moves along. In the meantime you can search the threads Spydertrader listed on the first page if you want more info.

Hope that helps. Regards - EZ
 
Today's holiday provided a good time for me to play some catch up and review some areas of discussion that I wasn't able to completely sort out the first time through. Although my channel drawings are not of expert quality yet, I feel I have made some decent headway the past few weeks, and believed I had attained a level of understanding concerning the proper mechanics. However, I now find myself somewhat confused again in an area which has befuddled me from the start. During the review, I came across these two posts, and in my mind, they seem to be at odds w/ one another, and am hoping for some additional clarification.

Snipped from excav8tr's post: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1319038#post1319038

"Once you have identified 1,2, and 3 the RTL is set in STONE (meaning no adjustments) the adusted pt three is used when you are forming a completely new channel and all you have to work with is 2 bars of data at a pt 1."

Snipped from makosgu's post:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1319756#post1319756

" EXCELLENT QUESTION. If my bar 5 extends beyond the top of bar 4, I plot in a NEW PT3. Why??? Because I am looking at my PRV and I find -PRV. With -PRV (ie. DECR PRV), I am not expecting the bar to BO from the RTL simply because DECR V dictates this is a NON-DOMINANT progression across the channel... "

If I am comprehending the above statements correctly, then excav8tr is saying that once a 1,2,3 channel has been created, it shall remain as drawn (volatility expansions excluded). OTOH, mak seems to state that he will allow an adjustment to be made to an existing channel.

Now for some possibilities of my misinterpretation:
1. I have perhaps taken at least one of these gentlemen out of context.
2. The addition of prv analysis to the discussion creates an apples to oranges comparison.
3. There simply are no hard and fast rules.

Sorry for the long post, and just hoping someone understands what I'm trying to get at, which is basically: Should we never alter a channel once drawn, and any "adjustments" should manifest themselves within a newly created channel? Thanks ...
 
Quote from mephistoII: Should we never alter a channel once drawn, and any "adjustments" should manifest themselves within a newly created channel?
More...
My approach is to plot a channel using adjacent bars and use it as long as price is operating within the lines (see gray lines on chart). Quite often, as shown here, the FTT and the following bar do not form a channel that will hold for very long. When price breaks the gray lines I am looking for an FBO to establish PT3. At this point I will draw the RTL from the FTT to the "new" pt3 using the color of the trend. This essentially "adjusts" my channel, but I generally resist altering or deleting existing lines.

<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1327899>
 

Attachments

Quote from ivob:

My chart so far.
More...

Shouldn't the white down channel be drawn through the 10:30 bar as point 3? If so, and to build on the mepistoII's question, is it correct to move pt 3 to 11:10?

Here's my take.
 

Attachments

Quote from mephistoII:

....

If I am comprehending the above statements correctly, then excav8tr is saying that once a 1,2,3 channel has been created, it shall remain as drawn (volatility expansions excluded). OTOH, mak seems to state that he will allow an adjustment to be made to an existing channel.

Now for some possibilities of my misinterpretation:
1. I have perhaps taken at least one of these gentlemen out of context.
2. The addition of prv analysis to the discussion creates an apples to oranges comparison.
3. There simply are no hard and fast rules.

Sorry for the long post, and just hoping someone understands what I'm trying to get at, which is basically: Should we never alter a channel once drawn, and any "adjustments" should manifest themselves within a newly created channel? Thanks ...
More...

-keep the old channel but you can also recycle point1 even point 2 to make a new channel as soon as you id new point3

-volatility expansions apply to point2 only

ps. we don't 'move' point3, we have new point3
 

Attachments

Cutting it a few minutes short today, but a couple of comments...

First, today I sensed a certain level of acquired unconscious competence. I'm beginning to sense that what I once thought was subjective is actually something else. Annotating is becoming more relaxed and automatic.

Second, it's clear (to me at least) that the earliest possible indent of FTT, even if you end up being wrong, is the correct procedure. By doing this, I've observed you are much more likely to be able to escape break even or even a couple ticks profit in those cases where you entered incorrectly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top