Whatever works for you. Fortunately, it doesn't come up that often, but one's tactics should be determined in advance so that one isn't thrown by it.
The Foresight Thread
- Thread starter dbphoenix
- Start date
Whatever works for you. Fortunately, it doesn't come up that often, but one's tactics should be determined in advance so that one isn't thrown by it.
About this 4600 business. I've been looking at the weekly chart again and noticed that we failed to reach the upper limit by about 30pts last July. As the important part of these channels is the median and not the limits, we may have come close enough to count as a reversal off an extreme. Granted if one is following the rules it doesn't make much difference. But that would help to account for the unusual behavior today (the Fed is hardly enough). AMT after all prescribes at least an approach to the upper limit. The numeral attached to it is irrelevant. 4600 sounds good, and it's easy to remember, but it may not be critical.
We'll see. Remember, no bias. Just follow the rules.
We'll see. Remember, no bias. Just follow the rules.
This isn't exactly foresight but I have no place else to put it so . . .
I was moseying around the internet for reasons that aren't important and came across this article about trending and ranging and how stocks or whatever trend only 30% of the time and so you want to buy things that are trending and not ranging. The following example was provided for something "trending":
And this was provided as an example of something "ranging":
There's just one tiny problem (though it isn't a problem for the SLA).
There are tons of ranges in the "trending" chart:
And as for the "ranging" chart:
(my apologies if this seems sloppy; it's difficult to distinguish between wicks and grid when they align)
Point is that the meme about stocks, etc trending much less than they range is meaningless. There are obviously trends within ranges, and if the ranges are wide enough, the trends don't even have to be scalped. Similarly, a "trending" whatever is going to be ranging periodically in order to take on provisions, enable latecomers to arrive, go to the restroom, visit relatives in the area. That the trend appears to be "broken" when these ranging moves take place is to misunderstand the nature of trend, which is why a "break" in and of itself is insufficient reason for exiting a trade. What if, for example, a trader in the first stock were to exit every time price rested? He might not lose anything, but he would be faced with the propect of re-entry, and that as we all know can be a giant PITA.
Which is all the more reason for knowing the rules and applying them without bias. One needn't even come up with an elaborate definition of "range" involving overlapping bars and lack of headway up or down and a volume component and so forth. One need only follow the rule regarding chop and stop trading when that situation presents itself. No decision-making required. It isn't even something that one need think about. Which can awfully calming.
I was moseying around the internet for reasons that aren't important and came across this article about trending and ranging and how stocks or whatever trend only 30% of the time and so you want to buy things that are trending and not ranging. The following example was provided for something "trending":
And this was provided as an example of something "ranging":
There's just one tiny problem (though it isn't a problem for the SLA).
There are tons of ranges in the "trending" chart:
And as for the "ranging" chart:
(my apologies if this seems sloppy; it's difficult to distinguish between wicks and grid when they align)
Point is that the meme about stocks, etc trending much less than they range is meaningless. There are obviously trends within ranges, and if the ranges are wide enough, the trends don't even have to be scalped. Similarly, a "trending" whatever is going to be ranging periodically in order to take on provisions, enable latecomers to arrive, go to the restroom, visit relatives in the area. That the trend appears to be "broken" when these ranging moves take place is to misunderstand the nature of trend, which is why a "break" in and of itself is insufficient reason for exiting a trade. What if, for example, a trader in the first stock were to exit every time price rested? He might not lose anything, but he would be faced with the propect of re-entry, and that as we all know can be a giant PITA.
Which is all the more reason for knowing the rules and applying them without bias. One needn't even come up with an elaborate definition of "range" involving overlapping bars and lack of headway up or down and a volume component and so forth. One need only follow the rule regarding chop and stop trading when that situation presents itself. No decision-making required. It isn't even something that one need think about. Which can awfully calming.
I don't like this post of yours. This has forced me to look through my bias. Even if price is close to TC and also at NH from the 2k bubble I suspect some kind of mild push by traders upwards to at least make sure it isn't just a fluke. To come so close and not cross over into the new ground seems a bit unnatural but maybe that's what a bias looks like! As long as the BO level 4460 or so holds there's hope price might find its footing. If that goes then it's all up in the air.
Gringo
AMT is what it is. I don't consider it to be a bias as price moves up and down away and towards the median. That it doesn't reach one limit or the other on that particular leg of the journey doesn't change the fundamental nature of price movement. If we don't reach 4600 on this leg, we will on the next. Which may be tomorrow or next month. And don't forget that we've spent the last five sessions in "new ground".
The longer one works with this, the better he understands how important it is to follow the rules. The losses are so minor and the potential gains so substantial that to second-guess oneself is about as self-defeating as it gets.
But then of course one must be able to draw a straight line . . .
The longer one works with this, the better he understands how important it is to follow the rules. The losses are so minor and the potential gains so substantial that to second-guess oneself is about as self-defeating as it gets.
But then of course one must be able to draw a straight line . . .
Well, so much for that
.Currently testing the bottom of this. If it doesn't hold, 4440 may reassert itself. The timing for this is wrong, but "judge the market by its own action".