I thought I'd create a new topic and try something out and see if it seems beneficial to everyone. I'll try to post every day or so the times that setups completed that I thought were good based on the methodology. I will only do posts for times for 3-minute or higher timeframe setups. If the setup is on a 1-min or 2-min but could be used as an entry setup for a higher timeframe bias I may mention those, too.

The idea here is to point out the completion points for setups I thought were acceptable so everyone can make sure they see the setup, and go back and do the work, perhaps working through how they might have entered, managed, and so on. Mostly, though, it is to give everyone a chance to see the places I thought were the best setups on a given day based on my application of the methodology. Some will not have 'played out', but were still worth looking at.

One more point. These are not necessarily going to be areas I traded off of, they are going to be areas I thought were good enough to be looking at. I am not implying I traded them. I may have, or may not have, but that will be independent of whether I list them here. I want to give everyone a chance to 'start to see' the areas I think are the ones that best fit the methodology.

Most of these will be ABCD's, even though I will sometimes find areas that have enough for me to consider them without the ABCD. As I generally say to my students 'The ABCD is the 'hub of the wheel', the center point of where I start.' I suggest until one has the methodology down cold, start everything with the ABCD. I may, though, throw in a few setup times where other factors contribute to the area (like POC, pivots, GLOBEX points, and so on) such that some of the usual KT factors may be less.

As you will soon see, the posts will be in a format something like this, of course subject to any improvements I discover as I try this:

March XX, 2009

10:34 AM EXP ABCD, 3-min

Any thoughts or suggestions welcome.

Forgot to mention my 'crazy' TL for the LOD. Go from the high on 4/3 to the low on 4/15, on a 13-min non-GLOBEX chart. Pretty cool.

Jim, Excellent Question. I hope I have an adequate answer. Sorry not to respond sooner, but I was running errands today.

Short answer, I believe, is lack of discipline. The initial entry for me (89 tick chart) was on a Kane ABCD setup which probably lacked context and was in an area in which I did not feel comfortable, for Kane ABCDs. ie, I lacked confidence, especially trying to get onboard an existing trend. Here is a chart. I am trying to replay this in ENSIGN Playback & learn from it. BTW, that 0.886 you mentioned, "Note the .886 ABCD in the GLOBEX at 7:00." (04/20/09) was pretty, but I was not at my computer early enough to see it.

Al Kamego

Al, I could do one of my famous ten page replies on this and not even begin to get into what I could say. But that's what I cover in mentoring and one-on-one, so this isn't the place for me to even try anyway. Here's the gist of it. 'Context' is everything. Where is the trend, and where is the correction? Do you feel the trend has more to go such that getting in this late still is a good opportunity (I didn't think so, and that's why I said no setups after the initial one in my daily synopsis). Also, I like 13 and 60-min setups, and I'll trade 3-min setups if they are part of a 13 or 60-min movement. These are all 1-min setups, way too small for me to trade.

So, where do the lines tell you to take setups? No lines, no trades. Not lines on the patterns, lines from the trend you are trying to get on. The small little patterns don't decide which way the thing will go, they will only confuse and whipsaw you. They are a way to get on something you have already decided you want to get on, not something to convince you you should get on board. The only thing I saw here that was remotely playable was what you have labeled as the bigger ABCD, where you finally had had enough. I thought the only option by then was stay with an earlier long, but if one wanted to take a shot anyway, that was the only place I'd even consider. It's good to practice, and shorter timeframes have lots of things happening quickly for practice, but if one practices on suboptimal setups all that will lead to is frustration and lack of confidence, in my opinion. I hope this helps.

context, one of the hardest things to grasp and learn I think, especially when it's a battle of the timeframes...

Thanks Jim, & thanks M. I appreciate you're taking the time to make the comments. Your points are all well taken. I still struggle with context, & I continue to review & reread the Kane Materials.

I hope to do better in the future.

Good Trading, All

Al Kamego

Well, I am still learning, too, but the biggest mistakes and omissions I have made in trading were context-related.

Thanks for your help, m.

Al Kamego

quote:

---

Originally posted by jimkane

BBJ, do you have any stats on how often the 200% IB is exceeded, like it was today (based on my data)?

---

Jim, I have no data about this.
FYI 2IB (MP nomenclature = 2 times IB = 100% expansion of the IB)

.

M, double yes. (trend dynamics)

Jim, whatever you put down in this forum is of value. I don't have the time to interact as much as I used to right now, but I do read everything and it's much appreciated.