Why do people use Volume, Range and Tic charts?

[ProfLogic]

Quote from rustrader:

partially right.

This term is misused by William Blau. He (not ProfLogic) is author of this technical indicator and he named it. He could name it anyhow. I agree, "ergodic" is not well turned and I personally prefer "true strength index" to avoid association with respective probability theory term.

no

ergodic theory is a part of mathematical foundation of statistical physics. So ergodic theory is branch of probability theory. It is about stochastic processes. BTW, the term "stochastic" is another example of misusing math term in technical analysis

chaos theory = nonlinear dynamic is about complexities in determinate processes most often described by systems of differential equations.

ergodic theory and nonlinear dynamic do have intersection but it is not the same thing.

I agree. "True Strength Index" would be clearer. I don't know why he named it that. I asked but never got a response.

Stochastic is Greek for "Guess" too . . .

 

[ProfLogic]

Quote from JimmyJam:

Case in point.

1) I use Point and Figure to determine what are called the Prime (or Major)Support and Resistance, and the market's major current trend.

2) I use a customized formula to determine the market's Minor levels of Support and resistance, and the market's minor current trend.

3) Range Bars instead of Volume Bars

4) Added-in a few more customizations that I developed through observation, reason, just plain luck, and I'm good to go.

Completely different setup arriving at the exact same philosophical trading space.

[Actually, ProfLogic's methodology maintains itself on both macro and micro levels - as evidenced by the multiple settings and setups he gave for trading using Volume Candlesticks, where as mine is not scalable in such a fashion, this tells me that he's working with a purer form of what is actually happening in the markets.]
***
The point in me mentioning this is that the trading concepts are universal, and by applying them to the specific situation you will have a better understanding of the markets (even if it's as simple as Don't Short a Bull Run in an Uptrend or Don't Buy Falling Knives in a Downtrend)

Extremely well said JJ!

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from rustrader:

partially right.

This term is misused by William Blau. He (not ProfLogic) is author of this technical indicator and he named it. He could name it anyhow. I agree, "ergodic" is not well turned and I personally prefer "true strength index" to avoid association with respective probability theory term.



no

ergodic theory is a part of mathematical foundation of statistical physics. So ergodic theory is branch of probability theory. It is about stochastic processes. BTW, the term "stochastic" is another example of misusing math term in technical analysis

chaos theory = nonlinear dynamic is about complexities in determinate processes most often described by systems of differential equations.

ergodic theory and nonlinear dynamic do have intersection but it is not the same thing.

thank you for the erudite explanation.

regards,

surfer

 

[JimmyJam]

Quote from marketsurfer:

thank you for the erudite explanation.

regards,

surfer

Now that rusty and marketsufferer have given us a lesson in theory on the Ergodic Indicator, let's get back to something that might be able to make us some money.
***
In reviewing the thread, I see what you are saying about not using multiple frames of refrence when trading this method Prof, that was something I was mixing in from my own trading, so my apologies there.
***
It is very telling is how, every time the market has attempted to stage a sell-off, Buyers have stepped in strongly to support the market.

This was particuarly true in Friday's trading when the market entered the close on strong buying, despite the fact that the indices, internals and bankers were all in the red.

This action can be measured by the strong divergence of the Ergodic vs. Price Action displayed in Friday's chart.

Friday a lot of weak Bulls were disappointed and closed their hands prematurely (no sufferer, I am not making an oblique reference to you), I think monday its going to be the Bears turn (and that's just how the market loves to work!) .

Best Regards,

JJ

 

[dandxg]

Quote from ProfLogic:

Now look at the 2401. This chart shows the transition of price from the 799.5 Prime Trend Resistance top. On the 2401 we see that this chart has Primes as well but these do not determine Trend (In this particular environment). These Primes are just pinpointing trading opportunities.

Thanks so much Professor for taking the time to respond to all of my questions. I truly appreciate it. I just need to study and process the info you provided me. What are Sundays for, but preparing to make money for Monday!

 

[JimmyJam]

Unfortunately QuoteTracker only has a look-back period of 10 days, so it doesn't lend itself to implementing the technique properly, but being familiar with the technique does give very good confirmation to my own trading process.

For the record, I'm anticipating a Higher Low right about the 1395 area (where the market attempted to establish Support on Friday) enroute to breaching the current highs in the 1407 area (ES contract).

Yeah, its been a profitable Sunday afternoon.

Best Regards,

JJ

 

[budha]

I've been creating varying tic and volume charts and comparing them to my usual "time" charts ever since 11-15-06 when fearless invited PL to elucidate on volume charts on this thread.

What I see is that sometimes a tic chart or a volume chart can make price movement appear to have more regularity but not always. Sometimes my time charts make price movement more clear (i.e., more cyclical)

Changing the number of tics or the volume of transactions that constitute a price bar in order to make price action look better seems akin to optimization when developing a trading system. A system that is optimized to perform well in one market condition will probably perform poorly under different market conditions. Likewise, does a volume2401 chart always enable you to "see" the matrix more clearly?

Admittedly, I haven't conducted an indepth analysis.......I never looked at a volume chart before PL mentioned them a few weeks ago.

Thnx....budha

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Buddha:

I've been creating varying tic and volume charts and comparing them to my usual "time" charts ever since 11-15-06 when fearless invited PL to elucidate on volume charts on this thread.

What I see is that sometimes a tic chart or a volume chart can make price movement appear to have more regularity but not always. Sometimes my time charts make price movement more clear (i.e., more cyclical)

Changing the number of tics or the volume of transactions that constitute a price bar in order to make price action look better seems akin to optimization when developing a trading system. A system that is optimized to perform well in one market condition will probably perform poorly under different market conditions.

Bingo Buddha!


you are on the right track. nice work! appearances in this game can be very deceiving. the claims in this thread have been extensively tested and evaluated by far greater minds than myself resulting in nothing of value. why everyone seems to be falling for this subtle sales pitch is beyond my understanding.

regards,

 

[Vienna]

Quote from marketsurfer:

Bingo Buddha!


you are on the right track. nice work! appearances in this game can be very deceiving. the claims in this thread have been extensively tested and evaluated by far greater minds than myself resulting in nothing of value. why everyone seems to be falling for this sutle sales pitch is beyond my understanding.

regards,

There he goes again... Mucksurfer just can just can leave it alone...
Understandibly: If I had a journal, and would lose as consistently as he does with silly "channel breakout" trades, I would also try to leave my own journal behind and try to divert attention elsewhere. The obvious question is of course if any of the Mucksurfer's current method has been "tested extensively".. if it has, it would seem that the testing must have been done by minds even less great than his own, judging from the sheer lack of profitability.... I mean, this is from a guy who -one one hand -claims "a great trading record over the years, there for all to see", obtained by some secret, mysterious "neo-gann channel" method, and then proceeds to say that after all these years, he tested THAT SAME TRADING METHOD and found it's signals to be of no better value than random! So, instead of contributing one shred of knowledge, anything, there always comes the underhanded accusation of "subtle sales pitch" and "vendor", as if anyone except Mucksurfer had ever even mentioned a website, a seminar, anything.

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Vienna:

There he goes again... Mucksurfer just can just can leave it alone...
Understandibly: If I had a journal, and would lose as consistently as he does with silly "channel breakout" trades, I would also try to leave my own journal behind and try to divert attention elsewhere. The obvious question is of course if any of the Mucksurfer's current method has been "tested extensively".. if it has, it would seem that the testing must have been done by minds even less great than his own, judging from the sheer lack of profitability.... I mean, this is from a guy who -one one hand -claims "a great trading record over the years, there for all to see", obtained by some secret, mysterious "neo-gann channel" method, and then proceeds to say that after all these years, he tested THAT SAME TRADING METHOD and found it's signals to be of no better value than random! So, instead of contributing one shred of knowledge, anything, there always comes the underhanded accusation of "subtle sales pitch" and "vendor", as if anyone except Mucksurfer had ever even mentioned a website, a seminar, anything.

yes, all traders have losing streaks--- i am in one now. yes, i found something that tests far better than my old methods--am i going to reveal it here, other than the trades it produces? NO WAY! this does not mean that it never loses, far from it.

however, my record, recorded in public forum since 1999, speaks for itself in both accuracy and acumen.

you are defending a person who claims perfection, who posted a nearly perfect track record for several years and sells seminars based on the above. why??