If he works with his assumptions, how could he understand the wisdom in your post and the posts of others?
Why support becomes resistance
- Thread starter BobbiDigital
- Start date
If he works with his assumptions, how could he understand the wisdom in your post and the posts of others?
You proposed examining a short sentiment trending process with an emphasis on liquidity in markets.
DB pointed out to you about liquidity's presence and absence.
In this post I will share real ideas that facilitate trading via monitoring and analysis of markets.
Any particilar market price value can have any context. You observe on charts. In the future, you may wish to broaden your observations to other indicators or other types of information. So may some of your respondents. This is required to deal with the topic you raised.
Your topic is a core topic for either macro or micro analysis and understanding. The core of market operation does not change day to day. It is consistent and foundational as expected for any body of knowledge and skills.
In trading, a person must take advantage of all opportunities and information facets.
At any limit of price excursion there are limits. The majority set these limits at that limit there is no liquidity. No liquitiy comes from the minority who will not play at the limit. People believe just who is in control at these extremes.
It is better to deal with the control idea in another place.
Shift to the micro level of BBid/BAsk and examine support and resistance. Draw a line. Let two pairs of BBid/Bask share the common point on that line. Examine just how the market shifts from one pair to the other going back and forth. Thank you for spending the time doing this examination. The DOM is where it is done.
Now, put support on one extreme; put resistance on the other extreme. Again observe the shifting from one pair to the other.
Remember the two values for S or R.
Let these two majorities exist for a period of time as a way to define a narrow CW term called "chop".
All of the above shows on the T&S as trading whereby the unseen orders are market orders facing the limit orders on the DOM.
Most active activities in markets are adding and pulling limit orders. The DOM velocity shows this as compared to the T&S velocity.
For your example, slowly pull limit orders from S value. Let it fall to a number of orders equal to the central common price value orders.
Then let the pulling continue to have the S approach just a few orders. Let the T&S show to you that this pulling rate is superceeded by the market orders eradicating the rest of S.
As price drops without S reforming as an extreme vale of limit orders, you can also see the possibility of the Wall first noted at R, "following" price downward by pulls becoming lower price value adds.
If the above has meaning for you, then you have just seen the sequence of "becoming". "Becoming" is part of the core of the system of market operation and it is unchanging from day to day.
Market participants come in all shapes and forms. Big smart money has a handicap in that its members do not take it's other members seriously by a traditional mistake whose components are pointed out more implicitly than explicitly by WRtrader's relatives and friends (Not WRT but his comments about others). The result of these blinders being always worn is the Walls at extremes. Walls at extremes have CW type names: S and R where the majority BLOCK and end trending.
I have tried to use the CW vocabulary to explain a couple of core ideas in the system of operation of the market.
I do use charts to monitor and analyze all of this. In dealing with the underlying system of operation of the markets, one has to go through deductive reasoning processes. Two proceses are involved: 1. taking everything apart and precisely, mathematically defining all the pieces; 2. Putting all the pieces together correctly to form a system, its process and the results of the process.
Not everyone can do the above.
Even more folks cannot envision the deductive process.
Almost no one can make use of the system of operation of the markets.
You do not know how to ask the correct questions. Your beliefs have destroyed the opportunity to ask the correct questions. Most people who answer your questions have beliefs whose consequences prevent them from understanding the system of operation of the markets. Check out the failure rate of traders as via the poor inductive proof of what is what.
Quote from NoDoji:
Years ago my friends and I found an "IQ" test on-line and we all took it. It was all visual pattern sequences and you had to choose which one came next. I ended up with the highest score. I think the ability to detect such pattern relationships is what made it fairly easy for me to discern contextual filters for when patterns "work" more often than not. However, all my "eyeball analyses" were tested to ensure they provided real edges
What you could do is make mathematical what your brain sees. Then you would have to work less, and your knowledge would be used by others. Essentially, the maths would replace the processing units in the heads of your friends with the processing unit that is in your head.
Do you still trade CL? If so why didn't you just trade gold on short side over the last year?
Quote from NoDoji:
Exactly. I have contextual filters for when I will trade "previous S becomes R; previous R becomes S" based on studies of the visual representation of price action leading into the instances when it worked vs. when it failed (by that I mean it resulted in a significant price swing vs. blew right through the level or hardly budged off it).
Years ago my friends and I found an "IQ" test on-line and we all took it. It was all visual pattern sequences and you had to choose which one came next. I ended up with the highest score. I think the ability to detect such pattern relationships is what made it fairly easy for me to discern contextual filters for when patterns "work" more often than not. However, all my "eyeball analyses" were tested to ensure they provided real edges
AHHHH ...... YES ..... What Must Come Next (WMCN) ...... lol
the next quiz is WWT .....LOL ....
would you like the mathematical version???
I don't think so. LOL ....
Sorry for this off-topic message but here it is:
Examine carefully jack hershey posts (if you have at least half a day to kill that is), it just seems that 40% of his sentences are simply pure random words/verbs gathered from random websites by a special software, the same kind of software that spammers often use to create phony articles/posts all over the internet.
The idea is to give the illusion that he has some kind of special and secret knowledge of the market by using nearly random sentences that simply do not make ANY sense at all. I mean it's not even gibberish, it's way, way beyond that!
Anyway.
Examine carefully jack hershey posts (if you have at least half a day to kill that is), it just seems that 40% of his sentences are simply pure random words/verbs gathered from random websites by a special software, the same kind of software that spammers often use to create phony articles/posts all over the internet.
The idea is to give the illusion that he has some kind of special and secret knowledge of the market by using nearly random sentences that simply do not make ANY sense at all. I mean it's not even gibberish, it's way, way beyond that!
Anyway.
a simple answer would be support was the last time the vehicle had a lot of buyers at that price, when it returned there , the leftover previous shorts buying to get back to even, to get flat,were a smaller number than those willing to sell at that price, so the support did not hold, when we returned to that price, the new sellers, leftover longs from the previous touch at that price were greater than the buyers on the retest and the support now converts to resistance , the price holds
I neglected to add an appropriate illustration I snagged recently.
I have a search engine that collects things my computer is making up for later posting.
Another time another place. The line is drawn at 64.50
Agree, which is why I got the sick prick on ignore, I suggest the same.