Spydertrader's Jack Hershey Futures Trading Journal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote from Jander:

definitely looks clearer the way you have it drawn. Had I started a new down channel at 10:00 (or 10:10) like you have, that probably would have helped a great deal. Instead, I kept fanning the red lined channel you have drawn in...
More...

I stole that way from Spyder. Considering the market doesn't move it's pace, in a herky jerky fashion, I figure a given channel steepness can often be followed by a less steep channel. That is, if we have good pace down, that most likely not immediately going to be followed by good pace up. Something is likely to happen in between, thus the shallower channel.

I've been guilty of getting in my head "what must come next" NOT in the spirit intend but rather as a definite something (which is prediction). Instead, I have changed the method so I keep asking myself to look for every possiblity, cycling through these in my head. This is the only way I can avoid getting stuck on believing something is going to happen, while in fact the opposite is already underway.
 
'What must come next' is not a 'price' but a sequence. For example, what must come next after a pt 2? Answer, a pt 3, etc.

This statement refers to sequences that repeat day in and day out, everyday. It is anticipation of what part of the sequence one is in and what must follow.

-Mike
 
Quote from Avi 8:

'What must come next' is not a 'price' but a sequence. For example, what must come next after a pt 2? Answer, a pt 3, etc.

This statement refers to sequences that repeat day in and day out, everyday. It is anticipation of what part of the sequence one is in and what must follow.

-Mike
More...

The problem is Mike, that these sequences absoslutely do NOT always play out. When we say WMCN, what really is being said is that something in the sequence must come next OR the sequence is no longer valid; and thus you get a WWT.

If this statement is not correct, I hope Spyer will say so, because if it isn't correct, there's a lot of people with mistaken impressions. WMCN, looked at with blinders on is akin to prediction.

If I "see" an FTT, then I know what must come next, decreasing volume back to RTL. That doesn't mean decreasing volume WILL occurr, rather it MUST in order to fulfill the sequence, which in turn will lead to the next element in the process.

No one has every pointed this out before, but there is a world of difference between MUST and WILL. MUST implies something, WILL is a prediction.
 
Quote from bundlemaker:

The problem is Mike, that these sequences absoslutely do NOT always play out. When we say WMCN, what really is being said is that something in the sequence must come next OR the sequence is no longer valid; and thus you get a WWT....
More...
Bingo!
 
Im sure everyone knows what to do when the sequences unfold how they are anticipated. The mucky grey area that is the key to figuring it out, in my opinion, is when to <u>know</u> the sequence is invalidated. There are alot of things that come up that dont go according to plan, but dont necessarily invalidate the sequence. It would be nice to have a flowchart to follow when these instances come up, and I think I may have seen one somewhere posted by Jack. Anyhow, this is alot easier in practice than application...
 
Quote from bundlemaker:

The problem is Mike, that these sequences absoslutely do NOT always play out. When we say WMCN, what really is being said is that something in the sequence must come next OR the sequence is no longer valid; and thus you get a WWT.
More...

The phrase 'what must come next' seems to be imprecise. I think you've refined it correctly. Restating it, I believe the precise statement is 'what must come next if my current view of the market is correct and the market does not change before that point arrives'. If that doesn't come next, either my view of the market is incorrect or the market has changed (and there are degrees of change). My job is to determine which is the correct case.

- Talas
 
Quote from bundlemaker:

Spyder's words led me to believe that as a binary system
More...

Spydertrader didn't lead you to believe anything. Spydertrader told you exactly how it is.

In a binary system, when one does not have a signal for change what signal then remains?

When Jack says, "The market isn't telling me anything here" and the system under discussion seeks to show when one has change, then one must have continuation.

Feel free to invent any paradigm which you feel best allows you to cope. However, unless undefined results in a different action than continuation, you've created a meaningless paradigm. Continuation signals Hold or Wait. Does undefined signal something other than hold or wait?

Lack of a change signal means one thing - continuation.

- Spydertrader
 
Quote from Spydertrader:

Spydertrader didn't lead you to believe anything. Spydertrader told you exactly how it is.

In a binary system, when one does not have a signal for change what signal then remains?

When Jack says, "The market isn't telling me anything here" and the system under discussion seeks to show when one has change, then one must have continuation.

Feel free to invent any paradigm which you feel best allows you to cope. However, unless undefined results in a different action than continuation, you've created a meaningless paradigm. Continuation signals Hold or Wait. Does undefined signal something other than hold or wait?

Lack of a change signal means one thing - continuation.

- Spydertrader
More...

I'm not trying to invent anything new. I'm trying to understand. Without concrete examples to observe, I am left guessing. I made the post not to antagonize you, but to attempt to increase my level of understanding.

NO WHERE IN THIS THREAD was it stated explicity that "the market not telling me anything" (due to data that is incongruent) should be read as continuation. Again, a lack of example leads to confusion on the part of the student. I will not take responsiblity for this, it lies with the professor in this case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top