Spydertrader's Jack Hershey Futures Trading Journal

[Haroki]

Quote from bundlemaker:

Haroki,

What I heard Jack say, in person, is that once volume is extreme and several bars back to back are extreme, you look at all extreme bars as roughly the same volume.

That's right, thank you. I thought I read something like what you're saying here.

So am I correct when I say that he advised to folllow price trends at this point, and to not give the same kind of weight to volume trends during these periods? Or am I totally off the reservation?

Did more searching and can't find any references to it at all........

 

[bundlemaker]

Quote from Haroki:

That's right, thank you. I thought I read something like what you're saying here.

So am I correct when I say that he advised to folllow price trends at this point, and to not give the same kind of weight to volume trends during these periods? Or am I totally off the reservation?

Did more searching and can't find any references to it at all........

I think you have misunderstood. Nothing changes. You still do gaussians. Volume is just as important as ever. The only the difference is you're not trying to decipher any meaning from variations of the extreme volume bars which are adjacent to one another.

For example: volume increasing bar to bar until a bar hits extreme, say 20k, Next bar is 30k, next bar 25, next bar 35. You wouldn't try and make anything of this variation. THey're all extreme and you draw in a gaussian where it's supposed to be, based on channels.

I hope this makes sense. And of course, if I'm off base on this Spyder please let us know. What I have described is my understanding of what Jack told us in Tucson.

Edit: I think a better way to say this is simply that several adjacent extreme bars can be taken to be the same pace.

 

[Haroki]

Quote from bundlemaker:

I think you have misunderstood. Nothing changes. You still do gaussians. Volume is just as important as ever. The only the difference is you're not trying to decipher any meaning from variations of the extreme volume bars which are adjacent to one another.

For example: volume increasing bar to bar until a bar hits extreme, say 20k, Next bar is 30k, next bar 25, next bar 35. You wouldn't try and make anything of this variation. THey're all extreme and you draw in a gaussian where it's supposed to be, based on channels.

I hope this makes sense. And of course, if I'm off base on this Spyder please let us know. What I have described is my understanding of what Jack told us in Tucson.

Edit: I think a better way to say this is simply that several adjacent extreme bars can be taken to be the same pace.

Thank you - that's how I remember it .... now.

 

[Haroki]

Quote from Aurum:

Spyder and Jack have both commented that any volume over Extreme levels they consider to be equal. In other words, if you are in the extreme zone you don't need to compare volume - only price.

-Au

LOL-

Had to read thru 200 pages to find this

 

[TIKITRADER]

I notice Tick consolidation patterns often appear at trendline breakouts.

This snapshot comparison has been done in hindsight.

Just going over channels, and comparing them to the tick charts, to notice what takes place at trendline breakouts, failed b/o's, and ftt's.

This example is from Friday, and is the ym 2 minute chart.

 

[R/R]

Quote from Haroki:

LOL-

Had to read thru 200 pages to find this

I'll just throw this point in during this extreme volume discussion to make sure it isn't overlooked.

When attempting to differentiate an FTT from a Flaw you still need to think in terms of relative volume levels regardless of whether you are in the extreme pace level or not.

There was discussion that touched on this in the Chat Room which I saved to my notes. Hopefully I have interpreted Spy's comments in the proper context.

the following is from ET Chat 6/11/07:
Spydertrader ( 12:22:04 PM) 11:45 and 11:50 appears like we might have one of them there odd harmonics right? followed by VE. so it APPEARS we have our pre-conditions set (flaws and VE in a traverse) so when we see the double top at :45 and :50 we think this must be it, an FTT. but we have to make SURE. note the extremely low volume on :50 compared to :45

Spydertrader ( 12:24:25 PM) our brains need to then think "I must have another flaw based on this volume)

Pr0crast ( 12:24:29 PM) extremely low volume? i have 22k on that bar 11:50, 1145 = 30k

Spydertrader ( 12:25:32 PM) so compared to the :45 bar :50 has significantly LESS

Pr0crast ( 12:25:34 PM) 55 was just barely below the 50 bar. when i see 22k after a 30k bar you're saying i should see that as "significantly less?"

Spydertrader ( 12:27:01 PM) I am saying 40-60 % of the previous bar volume your brain should move to flaw instead of FTT. higher the volume bar is compared to the previous the more likely it is an FTT lower the volume compared to the previous bar more likely it is a flaw, 40-60 is the turning point

 

[Haroki]

Quote from R/R:

I'll just throw this point in during this extreme volume discussion to make sure it isn't overlooked.

When attempting to differentiate an FTT from a Flaw you still need to think in terms of relative volume levels regardless of whether you are in the extreme pace level or not.

There was discussion that touched on this in the Chat Room which I saved to my notes. Hopefully I have interpreted Spy's comments in the proper context.

the following is from ET Chat 6/11/07:
Spydertrader ( 12:22:04 PM) 11:45 and 11:50 appears like we might have one of them there odd harmonics right? followed by VE. so it APPEARS we have our pre-conditions set (flaws and VE in a traverse) so when we see the double top at :45 and :50 we think this must be it, an FTT. but we have to make SURE. note the extremely low volume on :50 compared to :45

Spydertrader ( 12:24:25 PM) our brains need to then think "I must have another flaw based on this volume)

Pr0crast ( 12:24:29 PM) extremely low volume? i have 22k on that bar 11:50, 1145 = 30k

Spydertrader ( 12:25:32 PM) so compared to the :45 bar :50 has significantly LESS

Pr0crast ( 12:25:34 PM) 55 was just barely below the 50 bar. when i see 22k after a 30k bar you're saying i should see that as "significantly less?"

Spydertrader ( 12:27:01 PM) I am saying 40-60 % of the previous bar volume your brain should move to flaw instead of FTT. higher the volume bar is compared to the previous the more likely it is an FTT lower the volume compared to the previous bar more likely it is a flaw, 40-60 is the turning point

Thx, this kinda brings into focus what I was trying to ask.

Namely, with pretty much all the bars above the extreme pace line, should we still continue to use the gaus as signs of continuation and change.

Looks like the advice is that we should under these circumstances. Perhaps Jacks comments about treating adjoining extreme bars as equal volume were more keyed into times when we have "normal" volume days?

I say that cuz if we look at Friday, the gaus make "sense" if we annotate disregarding the advice about treating the bars as equal volume - they give nice signals for continuation or change, which we wouldn't get if we treated the bars as "equal volume".

A perfect example for me is the long signal from 11:40 -12:20 on inc black, followed by a retrace until 12:55 on dec red. That's a VERY clear signal that we're in a dom uptrend, one you wouldn't get if you treated the bars as "equal" since they're all above 20k. Granted, you get an FTT at 12:25, and that's also a very clear signal, but without using the volume gaus, how does one figure out which trend is dominant?

 

[Ezzy]

Quote from R/R:

I'll just throw this point in during this extreme volume discussion to make sure it isn't overlooked.

When attempting to differentiate an FTT from a Flaw you still need to think in terms of relative volume levels regardless of whether you are in the extreme pace level or not.
snip . . .

R/R,
Very good point. The extreme volume bar issue was on the Jan Tuscon vid, the gaussian session. The context was gaussians, not FTT's. Thanks for bringing that up to clear up any confusion. - EZ

 

[Spydertrader]

Quote from cnms2:

When you step back to the slower fractal, that tapes the day, the clarity is stunning: today's ES had a W day.
<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1564214>

Quote from Spydertrader:

On a five minute chart, you can know the 'type' of day to expect (meaning whether or not to expect an 'M' / 'W' day or neither) within the first three bars.

Quote from ang_99:

Could you elaborate on this statement a bit?

Yes. I could. However, one could (just as easily) collect a few 'M' or 'W' day charts. Note the various characteristics which transpire within the first 20 minutes of the open, and then, compare those characteristics to days which are not 'M' or 'W' days. One would then arrive at an answer equal to one I could provide.

- Spydertrader

 

[ang_99]

Quote from Spydertrader:

Yes. I could. However, one could (just as easily) collect a few 'M' or 'W' day charts. Note the various characteristics which transpire within the first 20 minutes of the open, and then, compare those characteristics to days which are not 'M' or 'W' days. One would then arrive at an answer equal to one I could provide.

- Spydertrader

Ah man, you're gona make me do work!

Ok, I'll give it a shot.