Originally posted by jarek

Another new high on Monday morning. I guess less and less shorts want to keep their positions over the weekend so once this sequence fails it might be a spectacular failure

After they made sure last week that almost no shorts are left, the market is definitely ready for such scenario

But, this is still acting like it is going to need more than the standard correction back to the first support like it has been doing lately. We'll see. Maybe a news event this weekend? But I just let it do what it does, and maybe that is up again. Who knows.

Originally posted by jimkane

...As far as the setup and PTA, it's there...

It was also on my original set from the beginning of the week as a 1.618 DT ABCD:



Looks like my 1.460 DT ABCD was premature...

Very good. I also have another interesting set there that pointed to the 1.618 area for the DT. Now it is set up for for Sunday night/Monday up sequence. But, we'll see if the modified Fed rule overcomes that.

answer to tomo's question has a couple of parts.... i have written in the distant past about the3 harmonics trade the coming together of the gann, fib, and medianline frequency...and how it will''overshoot'' till it hits all 3... in this case4210 was both gann and fib... price had to'' overshoot''... those who track the geometry very very carefully have seen how the computers have altered the game in the last few weeks..more and more they are gunning to the .94... i know it , jim knows it, the computers know it, but i can't teach the .94 on opening gap publicly so i continue to call it .886...when i target trade, i always divide by four to get 4/1 rr.so i used the blue ml as initial target and set my stop...now those of us who have really focused have noticed the computers screwing with this also.. just recently the FAZ trade to the .886 while at the same time the FAS took out the pivot...and compare your spy chart to the sso today!!!!! was it even the same day?the game as i have been playing it is evolving....but if you watch a stack of charts as i do,, sooner or later the coomputers show their intent.i have yet to see a case where the vast majority all point in the same direction, as then price goes against it....if you would like i will show you a remarkable day where everything came together with trade signals within a 5 minute period... yet in each index it was a different signal from my list.only by watching the stack of charts did i know this.

Originally posted by roofer

answer to tomo's question has a couple of parts.... i have written in the distant past about the3 harmonics trade the coming together of the gann, fib, and medianline frequency...and how it will''overshoot'' till it hits all 3... in this case4210 was both gann and fib... price had to'' overshoot''... those who track the geometry very very carefully have seen how the computers have altered the game in the last few weeks..more and more they are gunning to the .94... i know it , jim knows it, the computers know it, but i can't teach the .94 on opening gap publicly so i continue to call it .886...when i target trade, i always divide by four to get 4/1 rr.so i used the blue ml as initial target and set my stop...now those of us who have really focused have noticed the computers screwing with this also.. just recently the FAZ trade to the .886 while at the same time the FAS took out the pivot...and compare your spy chart to the sso today!!!!! was it even the same day?the game as i have been playing it is evolving....but if you watch a stack of charts as i do,, sooner or later the coomputers show their intent.i have yet to see a case where the vast majority all point in the same direction, as then price goes against it....if you would like i will show you a remarkable day where everything came together with trade signals within a 5 minute period... yet in each index it was a different signal from my list.only by watching the stack of charts did i know this.

Thanks roofer. Nice explanation. And yes I would like to see this day you are talking about if you have time.
As to 88.6 and 94.1 .. I must admit that I first heard about them in Steve Copan work. He does market matrix and he is using those two Fibs extensively. Of course I do not know from where he has them :) probably from Jim.

Originally posted by jimkane

Because the price action is not acting like it wants to go up at all. It may, they may do one of those fake, miraculous late Friday ramp ups, ones that come out of nowhere, or they may run it Sunday night/Monday, but so far it is acting like there is more downside to come.

Nice call Jim. As usual. I also was looking at the setup ... and wonder what was wrong with it? All in place .. even context is behind this trade. Saying that I was short at the moment and covered for small profit when it moved down. But now I am thinking rally again and waiting for bigger sell off starting next week.
Jim if you can elaborate what you see here as a problem against this setup it would be great. Of course if it is not only for one on one students.
Thanks for great posts to Jim and Jarek. Poland rules :) .. just kidding

when i first subscribed to stockcharts i figured the one dollar a day was worth it to be able to keep and notate thousands of charts and to be able to post a chart to my fellow traders in a couple of minutes.over time i made an important discovery and dumped all my expensive trading software... yes, i trade the stockcharts exclusively.ALL MY TRADING THOUGHTS ARE FIXED... they are not flasing or moving... stock charts allows me to view in a scroll a set of 10 charts FIXED IN A MOMENT IN TIME... that is how i am able to process alot of info quickly... i am not distracrd by moving and flashing charts.

let's say you are in a trading enviroment where when stocks go down oil and oil stocks go down while bonds rally... now i know IN ADVANCE that my predefined list of trade setups includes X- marks the spot, anABCD with the form 1.27/.786 that completes at lines,anABCD that completes at .382, the .886 on opening gap, a test and retest after amedianline handoff with THE TRADE in place, and a retest after anABCD that completes at .618.what if you had a moment in time when all of these hit? would you have a good idea what was coming next? here is what i saw...

Excellent, excellent work, roofer. Thanks for posting all that.

I do ask, and I'm sure you already are aware of this, that you don't post those Trend Direction and Expanding ABCD's with the parameters outlined outside of this forum. I'd hate for those to become commonplace for the average trader. I don't want to force the computers to change their routines that we know so well :-) Thanks.

jim- when i was interested in elliot wave 30 years ago, i learned what you call a trend direction abcd as a x-abc running correction and the expanded as a complex correction, without any of the fib attached... the only patterns that were new to me from your books were the double top abcd and your 4 pt as described compared to triangle in your book.in fact it was your emphasis on those patterns that i had seen from elliot that first attracted me to your work.

I agree, roofer, that those variations are 'spin-offs' on Elliott patterns, but nowhere in Elliott did anyone before me use Fib parameters of 1.128-1.272 and .786-.886 for the areas for B and D points. There wasn't even an .886 and 1.128 area to watch until I quantified it. So, although I see Elliott people point out those patterns all the time, I've still not seen anyone label my specific parameters with them as guidelines for their application. That is what I would ask that you don't post.

Hey T,

Great post. I agree with all of it. It's too bad both you and I have developed so much stuff and we wind up keeping it to ourselves. I am in your camp in that I think revealing it will dilute it to the point of uselessness. It only makes sense to me that if you have an edge and you tell the computer drones how you exploit that edge they will work it to death and it will disappear. But roofer has blasted his stuff out there in great detail and it seems to have no effect on it whatsoever, so maybe his take (and Scott's, as I understand it) is correct and it doesn't matter. Or maybe it matters for some things and not others. I just know the risk to me and my well being seems great revealing things that took me thousands of hours to discover.

I can't explain the lack of participation, or lack of interest, except to say it is the same on every forum I see everywhere. There are always one or two or three posters, and everyone else does nothing or asks super-low-level basic questions and that's it. There just aren't too many people willing to do the work, the tens of thousands of hours it takes. I'd say this is America, the home of the fat and lazy MTV generation, but it's a worldwide audience, and it doesn't seem to matter. All I know is I've tried and tried, and I can't get the interest. I mean, I mentioned perhaps getting together for a week in real time for free, if a certain set of conditions could be met (the key one being a certain level of participation), and it wasn't even close. If you can't even give it away, what does that say?

As far as the other topic, yes, T, those are great issues, ones I talk at great length with my students about. Once the techniques are mastered, those areas become the most important to work on. But, alas, it's not been anything in here that anyone wanted to spend time on. I've done what I can as far as articles and commentary on the website, but I'm not going to spend time I don't have starting endless topics in here that get three reads, it's just nuts. That's why I have said many times I'm just going to fold the forum. But then two or three people tell me it helps them a lot and they implore me not to, and I don't. But, it's such a small handful. And it seems to me we are really doing some amazing work in here. Oh, well, as T says 'I'm just saying...'