Trading Basics

[schizo]

Ummm... the author RIGHTFULLY left them out.
They are NOT Bullish Engulfing bars/patterns!

That was my thought too.

Engulfing of the body perhaps if thats one way to interpret them but classically they engulf the entire candle.

No, sorry but I believe it's you who's mistaken.

By definition, Engulfing Pattern is where the second candle body completely ENGULFS the first candle body (or nearly engulfs in our case, since that's how the author has done for his patterns) without regard to the length of the tail shadows. (See below.)

You might be thinking of "Outside Bar", which is not the same as the Bullish Engulfing.

 

[semperfrosty]

No, sorry but I believe it's you who's mistaken.

By definition, Engulfing Pattern is where the second candle body completely ENGULFS the first candle body (or nearly engulfs in our case, since that's how the author has done for his patterns) without regard to the length of the tail shadows. (See below.)

You might be thinking of "Outside Bar", which is not the same as the Bullish Engulfing.

View attachment 329184

Ok thanks.

The candles in the picture are the way ive always seen them in study but i stand corrected.

 

[tiddlywinks]

I got the candlestick education I paid for. No wonder I use OHLC bars!

 

[SunTrader]

I'm not arguing about "trend, impulse, correction, range a candlestick pattern happens".

Look at those 2 Bullish Engulfing patterns that I've marked on the chart. Those were intentionally left out by the author. If they were included as they should have, then those trades would have ended up as losers. He clearly left them out on purpose and that's what I call "cherry picking".

You might be right but without context from the author I don't know.

Because most, if not all, of the trading books I have point out that signals have to be put in context where market is in relation to price, time, pattern, momentum etc.

Otherwise the signal is to be ignored. Even then a setup/trigger gets one into the trade .... or not.

If this author didn't put forward that basic premise then yes he/she cherry-picked the good ones.

 

[schizo]

You might be right but without context from the author I don't know.

Because most, if not all, of the trading books I have point out that signals have to be put in context where market is in relation to price, time, pattern, momentum etc.

Otherwise the signal is to be ignored. Even then a setup/trigger gets one into the trade .... or not.

If this author didn't put forward that basic premise then yes he/she cherry-picked the good ones.

But if you noticed, he used the same Bullish Engulfing (BE) pattern to enter 4 trades at the BOTTOM (I even highlighted them for ya).

Again, this has nothing to do with the author's trading skills. I'm sure none of these are actual trades. He's demonstrating what BE is and how it is to be traded. If that's the case, why include only the winners? Why not include the losers as well?

 

[SunTrader]

But if you noticed, he used the same Bullish Engulfing (BE) pattern to enter 4 trades at the BOTTOM (I even highlighted them for ya).

Again, this has nothing to do with the author's trading skills. I'm sure none of these are actual trades. He's demonstrating what BE is and how it is to be traded. If that's the case, why include only the winners? Why not include the losers as well?
View attachment 329195

I don't know. Could it just be an oversight? Again we have no context - just a chart image.

 

[schizo]

I don't know. Could it just be an oversight? Again we have no context - just a chart image.

I just added the context for ya. I can assure you, there were none. Had there been one, I would't have bothered showing my discontent in the first place. Unfortunately, this is pretty standard practice in a lot of TA books and it should raise a red flag for the readers. Newbies beware!

In any case, that's all from me on this subject.

 

[SunTrader]

I just added the context for ya. I can assure you, there were none. Had there been one, I would't have bothered showing my discontent in the first place. Unfortunately, this is pretty standard practice in a lot of TA books and it should raise a red flag for the readers. Newbies beware!

In any case, that's all from me on this subject.

View attachment 329208

I know you're done with this fine ... but your initial post asked a question while it seems all along you had the answer you wanted and framed it trying to get agreement. Some have. I can't without more meat on the bone. With all the stuff you've posted, some of which it looks like you typed, most I supposed were scanned. Yet only a chart image for this???? Though I'll move on and make through the rest of my day without it.

 

[Picaso]

Great thread, Schizo, many thanks for the refresher.

 

[schizo]

It is a fact that institutional traders are the first to act when a big move is about to happen because they have the money to move the market and they are often the traders that give the market the push it needs to get started moving.

*****
"You need to be able to read the footprints the
institutional traders leave behind in the market"
*****​

That's not so difficult because roughly 95% of traders constantly lose money. Let the losing traders serve as your template for success. Let them become your edge in the market.


(Wow, that sounds cruel. But as they say, good medicine is bitter to the mouth.)