Click image for original size
Let's see if the dark forces Jim has mentioned here so many times will really be able to counter the mounting downside pressure ...
JA
jarek
Rep: 94
Posts: 3,474
So the line from my Friday's chart finally gave way with the close below it. We may also treat the last bounce as a return move and KIG to the trendline connecting major bottoms:
Let's see if the dark forces Jim has mentioned here so many times will really be able to counter the mounting downside pressure ...
Let's see if the dark forces Jim has mentioned here so many times will really be able to counter the mounting downside pressure ...
RO
roofer
Rep: 3,689
Posts: 3,574
bottom line...the tools from different time frames hold out diferent possibilities....examples
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
JA
jarek
Rep: 94
Posts: 3,474
quote:
Originally posted by roofer
i would point out also that the exact requirements needed for the lightning trade shown at this forum were met with yesterdays price action in $spx.
Thank you for pointing this out.
Looking at the time of your original post one have to admit that Joed's remarks at MG about you "outworking everyone" were definitely not exaggerated. Good luck!
SH
shmendel
Rep: 0
Posts: 33
Roofer, thank you. I'm going back to study your work. Your comments are much appreciated.
RO
roofer
Rep: 3,689
Posts: 3,574
the whole point of being here is to find your own template, to get to the point where you do not care what roofer or jim or tim or joed think..
RO
roofer
Rep: 3,689
Posts: 3,574
this is heresy at marketgeometry... yet here it is clear and powerful.by its very definition, the BLT ..must!! buy against a downsloping line... the line sorts the fib the fib sorts the line...THEIR COMING TOGETHER!!! SORTS!!! the importance of price at line from existing medianline set.to see all this , you MUST!!! out work all the other traders....that is the gift i was given in this life... the ability to grind... joed calls me the MACHINE THAT GRINDS..
Click image for original size
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
So, that was a 'W2' acting area there, and they did send it up to new highs, as I expected. They also did flush it out in GLOBEX first, but only down to 39, not all the way to the 36 I mentioned. Like I said, I'm losing my touch :-)
As far as the 'first move is almost always wrong' Fed move, it is based on the direction it takes into the close. The intial shakes aren't the basis of this, how it resolves to end the day is the 'wrong' direction. Just another thing to look at, study, and see if it helps you. It usually helps me, especially if it fits well with one of my scenarios.
As far as Elliott in here, let me briefly mention that I am not a strict Elliottician. In fact, I think strict Elliott counts messed up my trading more than anything else (even indicators). I take from Elliott the ideas of impulsive and corrective, and the idea of what starting moves can look like (W1 and W2 concepts) and ending moves (W4 and W5 concepts), and what happens in between, I could care less about. I find that rarely fits any Elliott counts. I don't care if people in here do counts, but understand that isn't part of my methodology except as outlined just now. Most of the key things I am looking for are not being posted. I'd prefer it that way anyway, as I want to keep that material quiet, between me and my mentor students, and I don't really want it spelled out in detail in here as a record that could possibly get 'hacked' some day.
As far as the 'first move is almost always wrong' Fed move, it is based on the direction it takes into the close. The intial shakes aren't the basis of this, how it resolves to end the day is the 'wrong' direction. Just another thing to look at, study, and see if it helps you. It usually helps me, especially if it fits well with one of my scenarios.
As far as Elliott in here, let me briefly mention that I am not a strict Elliottician. In fact, I think strict Elliott counts messed up my trading more than anything else (even indicators). I take from Elliott the ideas of impulsive and corrective, and the idea of what starting moves can look like (W1 and W2 concepts) and ending moves (W4 and W5 concepts), and what happens in between, I could care less about. I find that rarely fits any Elliott counts. I don't care if people in here do counts, but understand that isn't part of my methodology except as outlined just now. Most of the key things I am looking for are not being posted. I'd prefer it that way anyway, as I want to keep that material quiet, between me and my mentor students, and I don't really want it spelled out in detail in here as a record that could possibly get 'hacked' some day.
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
63-64 is the next spot I'm watching, if this doesn't fade out here at a lower high.
MA
Mats
Rep: 100
Posts: 262
Intresting areas ahead maybe?
Mats
Click image for original size
Click image for original size
Mats
JA
jarek
Rep: 94
Posts: 3,474
OK Jim, I will refrain from posting Elliott counts here in the future not to mess things up.
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
Jarek, no, please post them, I do it in my commentary. I just want it to be understood by everyone that although Elliott has it's place for sure, it isn't the core, or basis for my methodology, and if I 'trade around the Elliott counts' I tend to get hammered. I don't want people in here to focus on those as the core basis for finding setups. I am looking for trends that I think have some room to run, then I look for a corrective ABCD pattern that comes in at key Fib areas, with one, or prefereably two key lines coming into the area, and at least one line from outside the ABCD itself, sloping in the direction of the trend, and 'context' supporting the premise. When Elliott starting or ending moves support this, all the better.
It's just that if I see a '5-wave' correction and everything else if perfect, I don't pass it up because it 'doesn't fit', or if I see 5 waves off my key area and the next area I want to watch is still ahead, I don't tighten up because it's 5 waves, as I see 7 waves all the time, perhaps more often than 5 waves. And many time the counts can be rearranged and subdivided to make them fit, and I find a simpler, non-Elliott conforming count serves me much better. I take from Elliott what has helped me, and avoid the traps the strict interpretation force me into. I hope this clarifies things a little more for everyone.
It's just that if I see a '5-wave' correction and everything else if perfect, I don't pass it up because it 'doesn't fit', or if I see 5 waves off my key area and the next area I want to watch is still ahead, I don't tighten up because it's 5 waves, as I see 7 waves all the time, perhaps more often than 5 waves. And many time the counts can be rearranged and subdivided to make them fit, and I find a simpler, non-Elliott conforming count serves me much better. I take from Elliott what has helped me, and avoid the traps the strict interpretation force me into. I hope this clarifies things a little more for everyone.