Why Is The Obvious Not So Obvious?

[M4-1]

M4-1

Do you know nysestocks, or maybe you are nysestocks? Or are you another member of TFF?

How certain are you that your understanding of the "obvious" is the same as what nysestocks was alluding to in the opening post?

Thanks!
Ed

all that matters is as follows:

does it make sense
can i understand it
does it work
can i do it
can i keep doing it

if the answer to any of the above is NO..then there is something drastic wrong with the way you think..for..even a child could understand what i have explained about trading the MES..but then again..a child will not be a member of the "so many asses laden with books"..YET !!!

 

[M4-1]

..

 

[Vindago]

does it make sense --> it makes perfect sense
can i understand it --> yes, I can, finally
does it work --> yes, it seems so, but too small a sample to be sure yet
can i do it --> yes I can, still need some fine tuning but yes
can i keep doing it --> I don't see why not

I would add, Is it simple? yes it is, very simple indeed

 

[M4-1]

the man was frail..moved like a snail
but mind was fast..all in the past
he wrote some word..to most absurd
but to small few..it confirmed "i knew"

to Madame he spoke..it was no joke
of how they ruin..the merry tune
of course he knew..more than can chew
for it intent..to keep minds bent

you see dear sir.. it's not a blur
if open eyes..and look to skies
for up above..the white tailed dove
in sky so blue..does soar so true

to really see..or not to be
one must off load..the shite so bold
for History say..like yesterday
today will be..no different see

the fat arse boys..with all their toys
will twist the brain..down to the grain
but know you this..it is not piss
avoid the bliss..with the OBVIOUS

 

[baron193]

the man was frail..moved like a snail
but mind was fast..all in the past
he wrote some word..to most absurd
but to small few..it confirmed "i knew"

to Madame he spoke..it was no joke
of how they ruin..the merry tune
of course he knew..more than can chew
for it intent..to keep minds bent

you see dear sir.. it's not a blur
if open eyes..and look to skies
for up above..the white tailed dove
in sky so blue..does soar so true

to really see..or not to be
one must off load..the shite so bold
for History say..like yesterday
today will be..no different see

the fat arse boys..with all their toys
will twist the brain..down to the grain
but know you this..it is not piss
avoid the bliss..with the OBVIOUS

What a load of crap.....

 

[Pelt]

all that matters is as follows:

does it make sense
can i understand it
does it work
can i do it
can i keep doing it

For the layout described in THIS post, and the quote above... How many bars are required per chart to see what "IT" is or what needs to be seen?

I am asking this for a specific reason which may not make sense to most. I.e., say you could only see 2-5 bars per chart, would that information be sufficient to find entries.

 

[M4-1]

For the layout described in THIS post, and the quote above... How many bars are required per chart to see what "IT" is or what needs to be seen?

I am asking this for a specific reason which may not make sense to most. I.e., say you could only see 2-5 bars per chart, would that information be sufficient to find entries.

sure you can answer that yourself

 

[Pelt]

For the layout described in THIS post, and the quote above... How many bars are required per chart to see what "IT" is or what needs to be seen?

I am asking this for a specific reason which may not make sense to most. I.e., say you could only see 2-5 bars per chart, would that information be sufficient to find entries.

sure you can answer that yourself

Hypothetically speaking, would this amount of visible information be sufficient?

MP

 

[tiddlywinks]

Hypothetically speaking, would this amount of visible information be sufficient?

MP

So I haven't been following your discussion but here is my take, based on my PRICE-BAR-ONLY methods/techniques.

Out of the 9 pics... (I'll use Row:Column notation to point them out...)

3 of them are inside bars, and a definite NO without further inputs.
R1:C3,
R2:C3,
R2:C4

R1:C2 suggests a bounce or a failed break. To me this is a long, with entry at or below OPEN of the 2nd bar, with a stop 3 tics below the low of first bar.

R1:C5 and R2:C2 are continuation patterns. I will leave the precise entry/stop for you to decide. R2:C2 appears to be the better of the 2.

The other 3, without more input, would be gambling. No trades here.
R1:C1,
R1:C4,
R2:C5

That was fun!

 

[M4-1]

Hypothetically speaking, would this amount of visible information be sufficient?

MP
View attachment 259743

put it this way..try it and see where it gets you