Spydertrader's Jack Hershey Futures Trading Journal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote from Spydertrader:

...

Whoops! On Bar 10 we do not see increasing black. We see increasing red (possibly decreasing red at first, but red none the less). Since increasing red does not drive Price higher, we realize we have made a second error (First on the FTT [it actually was an FTT] and second on the misidentification of the HVS).

...

[/B]
More...
Spyder,

If one has an up channel annotated (pt 1 bar 5, pt 3 bar 7, see attached snippet), regardless of the flaw pattern on bar 8/9, wouldn't one be thinking change since price tried to go higher on decreasing black volume (in an up channel)? And the bar 10 BO (up chan RTL BO and/or the lat BO) confirms the FTT.

I'm curious if this is a reasonable analysis.

<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1476479>

thanks,

spooz
 

Attachments

Spydertrader,

That walk thru of Ivo's proposed HVS changed my perspective of the annotations on your chart. I see now that you are annotating how it turned out, not necessarily how you saw it at the time. You may have thought bar 8 was an FTT, and even traded it, then thought it was the start of HVS, then back to FTT, but when all was said and done, you annotate it as it turned out, without regard to what your actions were.

With that perspective I withdraw my questions about the dbl bottom FTTs on expansion. They looked like FTTs as they occurred, I traded them, they turned out not to be.

Fair enough,
Esteban
 
Quote from Spydertrader:

High of the 15:10 Bar yesterday. See attached.

- Spydertrader

<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1476412>
More...

Hi Spyder
That was an inspired choice for the Pt1 of the carryover channel. Was it chosen as the best fit or is there an absolutely objective way of choosing? (I note the associated LTL may have given clues on gradient.) I'm lazy with carryovers and realise it is a weak spot.

EDIT: I see now there was fanning.

Laterals:
Learning that price leaves the same way as it enters a lateral has done me more harm than good recently. I seem to find the exceptions to the rule more common. I accept this is probably due to missing something else in the formation or starting the lateral on the wrong bar. Can you give us some pointers on laterals?

Your post above was a "keeper". :D
 
I constantly compare current bar with prev bar, would it fair to say as long as current bar is 'inside' the prev bar then it is some type of flaw?
flaw-1.gif
 
Quote from spooz_trader1:

I'm curious if this is a reasonable analysis.
More...

Based on how you have annotated the chart (Point Three Up Channel / Bars 5 and 7), one would not have the same flaw pattern as I described previously. In fact, one could say, you have noflaw pattern. In other words, Bar 7 creates a Volatility Expansion and Bar 8 creates the left to right traverse (FTT to FBO using the entire Bar 8). We then see Price make another attempt at the LTL in Bar 9 where it, of course, fails to reach the LTL and clearly forms another FTT.

Nicely done.

- Spydertrader
 
Quote from spooz_trader1:

Spyder,

If one has an up channel annotated (pt 1 bar 5, pt 3 bar 7, see attached snippet), regardless of the flaw pattern on bar 8/9, wouldn't one be thinking change since price tried to go higher on decreasing black volume (in an up channel)? And the bar 10 BO (up chan RTL BO and/or the lat BO) confirms the FTT.

I'm curious if this is a reasonable analysis.

thanks,

spooz
More...

FWIW, I had the same analysis, but my chart is not as sexy as yours.

Also the YM was very useful confirmation over those bars - I thought that should be brought in to the analysis?
 
Funny how threads cycle go from DU to FRV of questions over and over:)

Here's another: When you draw decreased pace channel I'm curious how you decide which potential pt1's you annotate and which you skip.

Example: On today's ES chart your 14:00 bar was a pt1. That type I understand as stemming from an FBO of the faster paced previous channel.

I'm not seeing the specific logic of doing a pt1 at 13:15 and am wondering about possibly having a pt1 at the BO of the earlier CCC (around 12:45).

I realize I may be over-analyizing this and if so that would be good to know. If instead I'm missing something consistantly I want to get that fixxed asap.

Thanks!
 
Spyder:

I have a question about one moment of yesterday (where I exited the day).

On attached picture (and YM) there is a B2B so according to rules I'd say it's a PT3. In reality it turned textbook flag (continuation of red channel).

The question is: how would I know in advance it was not a valid PT3 (I see you didn't annotate it as such on your chart)?

P. S. Checked yesterday T&S and found that huge size hit which moved price higher. :)
 

Attachments

Quote from PointOne:

That was an inspired choice for the Pt1 of the carryover channel. Was it chosen as the best fit or is there an absolutely objective way of choosing?
More...

"It looked like the place to draw it."

That's best answer I can give you with respect to why I chose that particular Point One. If you note the previous day's chart, I had that channel already in place at EOD Monday (The Channel color is red on Monday. I changed it to Orange before Tuesday Open) As the market indicated I needed to 'fan' additional channels, I simply recycled the same point. While I would normally recycle a Point Three into a new Point One (as I do later on the chart for Tuesday), doing so in the morning created a wide lateral channel - not something which helps give clues to market direction.

With respect to more details on laterals, let me have a few days to think over what might help best. For now, focus on how Price moves into the lateral. Keep in mind to start with the bar you felt was an FTT - and not the bar prior to the false FTT bar. This should help you decide how Price entered the lateral better. Also, watch for FTT's or FBO's within the lateral. These overriding signals for change can often alter the outcome of a lateral channel.

- Spydertrader
 
Quote from nkhoi:

I constantly compare current bar with prev bar, would it fair to say as long as current bar is 'inside' the prev bar then it is some type of flaw?
More...

The answer to your question depends entirely upon how one annotated their channels. In Spooz's example, he had no flaws. In my example (and yours), we can see flaws. I consider 'inside bars' to fall entirely within the previous bar, and not, equivalent tops and / or bottoms. Under my definition of 'inside bar' it is highly likely one sees a flaw developing. Having said that, one still needs to continue to monitor for signals of continuation or change irrespective of what type of bar (flaw or otherwise).

- Spydertrader
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top