Technical Strategy
- Thread starter Tums
- Start date
The Day
Geommetry vs Gaussians.
Although the latter has to supercede the former, this generated a certain amount of conflict today.
Structurally, 12:45 looks like it initiates both a short traverse and a short channel. However, the gaussians preclude the former, and in doing so, the latter too.
At 12:30, I've annotated the start of my lateral. Six bars are utterly encased within the shadow of the symmetrical pennant, so to my (perhaps limited) understanding, there cannot be any doubt as to the validity of the lateral, which invalidates the potential 13:10 R2R, and thus the inception of the short traverse. If it were merely a cumulative thing, adding the tapes and faster fractal traverses then all the elements are present. The lateral is the spanner in the works, and unless there is a valid way to remove it, I cannot annotate that segment any other way.
The open also continues to puzzle. While the role of the opening tape is now clear, the gaussian signposts that should have presaged the subsequent short traverse still confound me.
More questions than answers with this debriefing.
<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2278755>
Geommetry vs Gaussians.
Although the latter has to supercede the former, this generated a certain amount of conflict today.
Structurally, 12:45 looks like it initiates both a short traverse and a short channel. However, the gaussians preclude the former, and in doing so, the latter too.
At 12:30, I've annotated the start of my lateral. Six bars are utterly encased within the shadow of the symmetrical pennant, so to my (perhaps limited) understanding, there cannot be any doubt as to the validity of the lateral, which invalidates the potential 13:10 R2R, and thus the inception of the short traverse. If it were merely a cumulative thing, adding the tapes and faster fractal traverses then all the elements are present. The lateral is the spanner in the works, and unless there is a valid way to remove it, I cannot annotate that segment any other way.
The open also continues to puzzle. While the role of the opening tape is now clear, the gaussian signposts that should have presaged the subsequent short traverse still confound me.
More questions than answers with this debriefing.
<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2278755>
Neoxx,
Do you have links for all this Geometry stuff your talking about. It seems to me your over complicating things. If I remember from one of Jack's "lost" posts, he said something like " analyze (A) the non-dom traverses slope to anticipate the strength/weakness of the pt 3 traverse.
Do you have links for all this Geometry stuff your talking about. It seems to me your over complicating things. If I remember from one of Jack's "lost" posts, he said something like " analyze (A) the non-dom traverses slope to anticipate the strength/weakness of the pt 3 traverse.
I've been giving some more thought to yesterday, particularly the confusion around late mid-day.
Assuming that the lateral was somehow removed, and the 13:10 bar had in fact denoted a gaussian shift, that would have been annulled by the bar immediately following, which confirmed a new long traverse point 3 rather than the non-dominant move of a short traverse.
13:25 would have suggested reversing back short, 13:30 would have confirmed it.
The next few bars should have denoted hold. An R2R then follows, then an R2B peak, but no B2R trough and sequence completion. Hence failure of a new dominant after the break of the channel RTL break and thus a new channel point 3 commenced with the FTT of the short faster fractal traverse.
Another thought. I remember Jack's comment that the charts of November were 'immaculate', and ideal for beginners. As I review yesterday I see stretches of low volume, frequent internals, lengthy laterals and a lot of overlapping bars. So maybe this is the normal state of affairs. Maybe things aren't always neat and perfect and organized. Perhaps that was just a fleeting luxury.
And the new day opens...
Assuming that the lateral was somehow removed, and the 13:10 bar had in fact denoted a gaussian shift, that would have been annulled by the bar immediately following, which confirmed a new long traverse point 3 rather than the non-dominant move of a short traverse.
13:25 would have suggested reversing back short, 13:30 would have confirmed it.
The next few bars should have denoted hold. An R2R then follows, then an R2B peak, but no B2R trough and sequence completion. Hence failure of a new dominant after the break of the channel RTL break and thus a new channel point 3 commenced with the FTT of the short faster fractal traverse.
Another thought. I remember Jack's comment that the charts of November were 'immaculate', and ideal for beginners. As I review yesterday I see stretches of low volume, frequent internals, lengthy laterals and a lot of overlapping bars. So maybe this is the normal state of affairs. Maybe things aren't always neat and perfect and organized. Perhaps that was just a fleeting luxury.
And the new day opens...
IMO, one needs be careful about what's news and what isn't. It will be very rare that OI's produce any significant price movement (and yes , what is significant?). The FOMC statement on the other hand can always be counted on to stir things up. Years back during my first, and very disastrous foray into the market, I spent a lot of time and money looking at the 'anticipated' vs 'real' effects of 'eco #'s" on price movement and found them to be, by and large, pretty much a wash, with a few notable exceptions. FOMC staements were one of these.
As is true for the over-riding aorta in the Tetrology of Fallot, so it is with the effects (generally-speaking) of eco #'s - things are more apparent than real.
lj