Volume
- Thread starter traitor786
- Start date
FF,i`d suggets you to drop this crap and use any sort of SR line instead of those imaginable End Effects.Don`t torture yourself,if you are not a masochist,of course...
If you feel that SR lines are superior to what Jack is proposing then please start another thread and I will look into.
From memory I remember the problem with SR lines is that there are too many of them. Every pivot high or low could be used as a SR line some time in the future. How do you recognize the important ones?
Around them there are multiple failures to break out in both directions whipsawing you to death. How you you stay with confidence in one or the other direction?
etc....etc...etc...
But I'm open... start a new thread and I will follow.
Quote from frenchfry:
If you feel that SR lines are superior to what Jack is proposing then please start another thread and I will look into.
From memory I remember the problem with SR lines is that there are too many of them. Every pivot high or low could be used as a SR line some time in the future. How do you recognize the important ones?
Around them there are multiple failures to break out in both directions whipsawing you to death. How you you stay with confidence in one or the other direction?
etc....etc...etc...
But I'm open... start a new thread and I will follow.
For freak sake!I was suggesting,use HLOC for the session(for e.g.,or whatever you choose) and see the volume behaviour near those lines.See where it`s significant and where they probably fail.It saves you a good deal of time on your jorney for the magic EEs,which don`t exist.Even if it do,Heshey won`t tell you,ever.Don`t you get it?
Quote from frenchfry:
I see. Thanks.
But why do you think Jack wouldn't tell/ show the EEs? He even revealed at least two "Quickies" (only five more missing). And soon he will send me the "Escape sheets"...at least that's what he said.
He`s wasted his life,no he wants others do the same.Your choice,though.If you feel comfortable with that mumbo jumbo,feel free to go on.
I can`t disregard him for the clues he gives in his posts,though,but i can`t keep up with his regular inventions almost on a daily basis.
And i definitely wouldn`t!I am not familiar with this newer T1, T2F, T2 labeling system, so I will do my best to refer to the items properly.
With that said frenchfry, I agree with you if you were looking at the different price forms, and you took three bars out of the sequence. For example, 68, 69, and 70 or 66, 67, 68. These are not laterals according to numerous examples in the past shown by Jack, and Spyder. In terms of price they define it as at least a three bar formation, were all bars after the first are within the high and low of the first bar.
66 and 67 is a even harmonic. I suppose you can say its similar to a lateral but its not a lateral hence why Jack has given this two bar combination another name. Now if you zoom into the two bars on a shorter time frame where more than two bars are present than that would be a different story, but that is not mentioned. So if that is the case it would be fair to include that in the explanation.
When you add bar 68, it violates the price boundary from the previous bar. Not only that, you have increasing black volume which means to process.
This is a quote from Jack:
"All inside formations have the same rules. The first bar is always processed. the second or sunsequence bar(s) is NOT processed if smaller in volume than the first. If NOT, then it is processed.
For out side bars, they count as two bars in a trends sequence. THe first value is done as usual. The second value is simple: it is the NEXT value in the trend sequence."
So knowing that, it gets more complex as additional bars become involved. One situation is when the 4th bar of the lateral sequence exceeds the highs of the previous bar. Then the next bar, the 5th one forms a FTP, and the 6th forms a short stich where price is now back into the first bars boundary. Is this still a lateral at this point?
There is a lot of information that Jack has covered on these forums that I have not seen, but reviewing laterals seems like a good idea.
Not just the basic definition of laterals. But defining them in every different case. In the context of the three fractals, but focused on Trading the Tape. Specifically covering each bar of volume, and how to determine continuation or change based on intra and inter bar analysis.
It would be wonderful if one day, most all us could stop asking Jack all these questions and could trade successfully on our own using his take on the Price Volume relationship. Or at least enough people could get this method down to a proficiency point where they could help others here in the online community and elsewhere.
I see Jack time and time again spending a lot of his energy on detractors that are not inline with his goals of helping people become self sufficient. He also helps others privately, that give little to nothing back to the online community where most of us live.
In addition, the people that have put in a lot of time and effort into this community that Jack started, have not been the focus of Jack's teachings. The 80/20 rule has been mentioned before. Sadly 80% of his time, has been spent repeating background, psychological aspects, generalities, and on detractors etc. A fraction of the 20%, I cannot thank Jack enough for. There are several treasures that have been provided, but for 99% of us, this has not brought us to the self sufficient level. Little bits of information here and there is great, but trying to find all these little bits while putting them together is an un necessary challenge.
The people that have spent a great deal of time learning, and participating in your discussions are your greatest asset. Don't make the mistake of loosing your focus on them. Instead, seek out advice from those individuals. Try to implement their critiques, and let them help you do 80% of the work. That way you do not end up spending the rest of your days fighting an uphill battle on these forums.
Respectfully,
Monkman
I know what you bring up is a common belief about trading, but its not true for everyone. You mentioned another member but I am not going to comment on that out of respect for that individual.
The post I wrote earlier, is honest, sincere, truth, that is meant to help. Very few people are willing to help anyone for free period. Jack is pretty much the Neil Armstrong in that respect. Except much more.
When Jack says anyone can learn how to make money with the basics of PVT that is true. Several people on this very forum have done it including myself. It might not be exactly what Jack does but its very similar. Spyder's early journals were incredible in that respect. We saw someone day after day succeeding on his own from what he learned online while continuing to progress. On the other hand the 5min bar by bar ES trading is the real get your hands dirty that takes details to another level. Even though I cannot yet trade the ES with a high enough consistency level, it has helped me significantly with how I read and annotate my stock charts. All this knowledge was acquired through online materials. Most of which is on ET.
Now we all learn at different levels, what works for one person might not work for others. With that said, I have never given up, and I do not think anyone else should that wants to succeed.
I know Jack wants others to be able to get to a level where they can trade full time for a living. But sometimes some constructive feedback helps.
- Monkman
The post I wrote earlier, is honest, sincere, truth, that is meant to help. Very few people are willing to help anyone for free period. Jack is pretty much the Neil Armstrong in that respect. Except much more.
When Jack says anyone can learn how to make money with the basics of PVT that is true. Several people on this very forum have done it including myself. It might not be exactly what Jack does but its very similar. Spyder's early journals were incredible in that respect. We saw someone day after day succeeding on his own from what he learned online while continuing to progress. On the other hand the 5min bar by bar ES trading is the real get your hands dirty that takes details to another level. Even though I cannot yet trade the ES with a high enough consistency level, it has helped me significantly with how I read and annotate my stock charts. All this knowledge was acquired through online materials. Most of which is on ET.
Now we all learn at different levels, what works for one person might not work for others. With that said, I have never given up, and I do not think anyone else should that wants to succeed.
I know Jack wants others to be able to get to a level where they can trade full time for a living. But sometimes some constructive feedback helps.
- Monkman
We can understand that price gives permission to measure volume.
We know the 10 cases cold. 2 give permission. 1 reqires that two volume and price cases be used on one bar.
we have 7 to go. Six are pairs.
the first bar has hppened and we only need to examine the second bar. We write in the log its price pair case.
Sym, FTP, FBP, Hitch, stitch red, or stitch black
These have been coded (meaning they have been coded by many many people and put into named libraries); they appear with a blue border and a yellow interior region. Their"perception comes easily and automatically.
Also it is know where the Arrow in he UL column of the log points. If it points to the second bar, a volume name is "True" in one or other of the volume columns OR an End Effect criteria is met and entered in the EVENT column.
The simplicity of SCT comes from three things:
1. the finite gating of price permission.
2. the three part volume test procedure to complete trends using a finite number of volume possibilies.
3. Always "knowing that you know" when an End Effect occurs from the item 2 above.
So what is left to do is explain the errors, I have suggested, are being made.
Here are the locations of the current errors of those who are "working":
1. Laterals are not done correctly. I will explain them with mathematical constructs.
2. The conclusion of the test procedure is NOT understood.
3. For some reason a myth exists that a person has to know each of the 35 End Effects that compose the FBO's of trends as well as what ends a full trend.
I'll do each on separate posts.
We know the 10 cases cold. 2 give permission. 1 reqires that two volume and price cases be used on one bar.
we have 7 to go. Six are pairs.
the first bar has hppened and we only need to examine the second bar. We write in the log its price pair case.
Sym, FTP, FBP, Hitch, stitch red, or stitch black
These have been coded (meaning they have been coded by many many people and put into named libraries); they appear with a blue border and a yellow interior region. Their"perception comes easily and automatically.
Also it is know where the Arrow in he UL column of the log points. If it points to the second bar, a volume name is "True" in one or other of the volume columns OR an End Effect criteria is met and entered in the EVENT column.
The simplicity of SCT comes from three things:
1. the finite gating of price permission.
2. the three part volume test procedure to complete trends using a finite number of volume possibilies.
3. Always "knowing that you know" when an End Effect occurs from the item 2 above.
So what is left to do is explain the errors, I have suggested, are being made.
Here are the locations of the current errors of those who are "working":
1. Laterals are not done correctly. I will explain them with mathematical constructs.
2. The conclusion of the test procedure is NOT understood.
3. For some reason a myth exists that a person has to know each of the 35 End Effects that compose the FBO's of trends as well as what ends a full trend.
I'll do each on separate posts.