Got it now, dawg? 
FRuiTY P.

FRuiTY P.


Quote from jack hershey:
Okay change of subject for a sec. Regarding sequences, we are seeing them now. The word comes up and they are also being mentioned textually. They, at first are short linked things often just pairs of stuff,
I could go through a sequence of ways as to how the sequences build from pairs to more and more connected trains. In the end you âseeâ them.
After that they have uses. The final use is to make trees of them. At branch points they take you through decisions.
At the KISS level, you see that the thing that happens is related to either: âwhat wasnât that?â and âHere is a flaw!â
What you are doing is eliminating the other path at a branch so, if fact, you are just left with what to look for next in the remaining branch.
Quote from FRuiTY PeBBLe:
OK, I'm gonna bring to the surface what some people are probably thinking, but are hesitant to say it because they don't want to appear mean. Before I start, I would like to say that I like Jack, I think it's great he's here on ET, and I'm very appreciative of the fact that he is willing to teach. That said, WHAT THE HELL DOES SOMETHING LIKE THIS MEAN?!
FRuiTY P.![]()

You mean, this Harry?Quote from wally_:
Would that mean that he is related to Harry...![]()

Quote from harrytrader:
Hihihihi :
Experimenting fractal rules : I have found a funny rule but it is just too recent. For example today I have these numbers (calculation from my model):
4 base min base: 7678.72 proj: 7628.28 05:00 (20:30)
16 proj min base: 7711.35 proj: 7556.77 17:00 (32:30)
112 base max base: 7871.05 proj: 7653.57 113:00 (128:30)
56 proj max base: 7815.53 proj: 7739.24 57:00 (72:30)
The market have followed the path
7556 -> 7711 -> 7628 -> 7653
which corresponds to the apparent logic pattern:
MinTP1 -> Dual MinTP1 ->(replace TP1 by TB1) Dual MinTB1 -> (replace Min by Max) Dual MaxTB1
If we continue with the same logic it will give:
-> (replace TB1 by TP1) Dual MaxTP1: 7815
P.S.: Of course he didn't did exactly 8556 but only 8562 but I think it is enough near to consider that he made 8556.
Exerpts from Jack Hershey:
We can add in the 1 min at crucial places.
Just cut to the chase using volume and price on the one min after synch of the open.
By going to 1 min you look at a tiny microcosm coming to and end so a change can occur. The microcosm âshortâ is not what is working. It is going to be hit by a leading market item that always comes into play. The only one that ever comes into play. What is is? IT is always volume stopping being DU or even better stopping being VDU (very).
In the microcosm increasing volume pushes the change.
For any trend we look to get three points to define the channel by two parallel lines. Point 1 is first on the right side; point 2 is âaway on the left. What we need last is the second point on the right side. It is point 3.
Most important to all of us is that this is the point 3 of setting up the âlongâ channel. Very important here.
Okay we now have volume in the picture from now on. We also have a way to get channel trends set up too. And we can do better sequences that link the indicators, volume and price.
Quote from FRuiTY PeBBLe:
OK, I'm gonna bring to the surface what some people are probably thinking, but are hesitant to say it because they don't want to appear mean. Before I start, I would like to say that I like Jack, I think it's great he's here on ET, and I'm very appreciative of the fact that he is willing to teach. That said, WHAT THE HELL DOES SOMETHING LIKE THIS MEAN?!
FRuiTY P.![]()
Quote from JohnnyK:
To Jack,
To improve my own understanding, I sometimes cut and past, reorganize and string together your comments, correcting any typos along the way. When I do this I designate them "[exerpts]". Hope you don't mind.
You suggested watching PV (the price/volume relationship) on the one minute bars in the context of expecting a "Point 3" in a possible trend. True?
JohnnyK
Quote from JohnnyK:
To Jack,
I have attempted to graphically illustrate (see link below) part of your response to Dawg regarding his long rocket after 11 am, March 7. I have included some of your comments and my own observations with the graphic.
To improve my own understanding, I sometimes cut and past, reorganize and string together your comments, correcting any typos along the way. When I do this I designate them "[exerpts]". Hope you don't mind.
Dawg debriefed the trade and wanted to know how possibly to avoid his 2 point loss due to strict adherence to the "rocket" rules set forth in this thread...or whether it is part of the territory.
You suggested watching PV (the price/volume relationship) on the one minute bars in the context of expecting a "Point 3" in a possible trend. True? And can you please correct possible misinterpretations/observations I might have drawn in the graphic?
To Dawg,
Does this clarify how you might have stayed long in the trade?
Your welcome,
JohnnyK