The bottom

[murray t turtle]

Quote from smaranam:

Before the bottom there are always convergence of circumstances.

=============
HIest probability is one could make money off that ;
and past trend study.

That is unless one tried to make that a prediction;
never confuse any probabibility with infallibility.

Wisdom is profitable to direct

 

[1a2b3cppp]

Quote from jack hershey:

My word choice is: " Based on the leading signal X from the logic R, I will be carving the turn with market orders beginning at the "time out" moment of bar W when in that bar there is certainty according to the entertwined five OOE's I use." In shorthand, the words would be "Reverse on bar W".

Paddler has explained he has names for all of these things; I can use his names so my comment is clear.

As you saw I made a call (long) on the trading fractal) from a chart (since posted) that was early (A term describing less than optimal). For that specific call, I used the FACT that the PRV was LESS THAN T1's recorded volume and the actual volume was even much less at the time of the "time out" snapshot.

Another poster hilightd a later bar which would have made more money on both of the contiguous trades. I do reversals so carving is doubly important). BUT the hilighting was done well after another bar had timed out.

I consider calls to be valid when made before the behavioral action that precipitated "earned profits".

For each of your suggested alternatives, I have reasons for nnot using them. My reeasons are that they are not "certain" types of situations, conditions or definable values for me. I do understand that CW peole who bet and use OODA do language their statements as you have provided. I do not BET nor do I follow the CW, especially the myths.

I do Systems Analysis in many fileds. I do the same in trading and investing. We are very fortunate that the markets work the way they do and any SA will tell you this makes it possible to do a complete design of a system for market operations.

Because I am an electrical engineer and I have advanced degrees in other fields and I am a consultant in many other fields, so I get to use SA a lot of the time.

I deduced all of the trend End Effects for any market. They fit into 13 subsets and each subset has a defined number of elements and each has a name. Only one test procedure is used to determine all bar names. All bars are nameable. A combination of three OOE's are used to name the non EE bars. All these OOE's relate to specific sequences where one of the three is determined the the focus, all according to the RDBMS of bars.

Other EE's or Theortetical Physists will gather immediately that I used Bandwidth Theory to conceptualize my work in the SA of market Problem Solving.

In RDBMS's bars are Relative and this means a vector is involved and not a scalor. Almost all of your statements of the possibilities are scalors so they are excluded.

No, that was the opposite of what I was asking for.

 

[tradingjournals]

Quote from tradingjournals:

Is my belief that QQQ 62.70 is around a bottom correct?

QQQ at the 65.20 area. Are profit takers/sellers around the corner? Is 65.49 an important level?

 

[tradingjournals]

Quote from 1a2b3cppp:

Could you share some charts, and grant me the rights to use them if I do?

 

[1a2b3cppp]

Quote from tradingjournals:

Could you share some charts, and grant me the rights to use them if I do?

Charts for what? The only thing I did in this thread was post a chart that kind of agreed with you about where the bottom is.

But it will be interesting to see what happens now since QQQ may be hitting some resistance (if you believe in trendlines, of course).

 

[icarus618]

Today was a BO of the channel. This is still a retrace - tongue in cheek, "the mother of all retraces" of the leg from late September (cf. the 3 prior retraces in the channel).

 

[1a2b3cppp]

According to that chart you posted, the recent low was a BO of the same channel, wasn't it?

 

[Took2Summit]

Quote from 1a2b3cppp:

According to that chart you posted, the recent low was a BO of the same channel, wasn't it?

the close is the most important, and if you notice there was no close below the channel line

 

[tradingjournals]

Quote from tradingjournals:

Is my belief that QQQ 62.70 is around a bottom correct?

QQQ at 65.32. Goodbye to the long side.

 

[1a2b3cppp]

Quote from Took2Summit:

the close is the most important, and if you notice there was no close below the channel line

Yeah, I never understood why people said the close is important.

Seems to me like it's ignoring data. If price went above/below a certain amount, you can't just ignore it because it wasn't the close. It still tripped limit orders. It was still a valid price.

Plus, if you use a different time frame, the high/low may very well be the close. This presupposes that daily charts are somehow different from all other charts.

Or perhaps the big players who control price look at these levels and say "regardless of where price goes, we're going to make it close above/below this specific point."

Beats me.

Seems to be two bounces off support today, though, where I drew the horizontal line on that last chart.