The week starts out 'interesting'. Gold is only a few cents from the 'magical' $1600 level. I think the only magical level is $10,000, and the musings on when that gets taken out. If it does, and the moves were proportional, that prices gas at the pump around $30/gal and crude around $400. Imagine food prices then. The Swissie is exploding, and the EUR/CHF just set another new record low, as parity is now the talk. And this has our futures down a whopping 1.75 points. Wow, pretty scary, the ES down 1.75 points.

This is a slow grind up on low volume, so it is very susceptible to any real sellers (like there are any of those right now...), but I just don't see them selling this. Nonetheless, the 1.000 ABCD is at 26 (the .886 ABCD has been hit already), as are some key lines. So, I will be watching this in here very closely.

.886 and 1.000 ABCD overlap at 133.07, analogous to my 26 area.

Originally posted by rat89

watch 53.68 sso/ 133.07 spy for a clue...?

This is curious:

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/presenting-ultimate-indicator-easy-money-access

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Starting to move right off 26... I just know it's teasing me. It won't follow through. Why? Because it would please me tremendously to see it roll right off such a key and obvious area. And this market does its level best to never please me, to make me sweat for every last tick...

it sure took a long time to react off that level....is the level a fake out, or the slow reaction?

I'd like to say I posted that too fast there, but watch this KZ first, then we'll talk.

Okay, this doesn't look like a tease.

Wait, as soon as he says that... I'm still suspicious.

Bounces up to a little KZ, and is starting to roll again. It needs to follow through and not get picked up here at this smaller GZ, and not chop all over the place. Follow through. I don't see it, but I have my fingers crossed.

I guess what I am saying is that not every time price hits a line, or lines confluence and price hits them, it's an area that produces a potential trading edge. With experience one can make an attempt at filtering out these areas that just don't have the right look to them. I'm not really talking about subtle, almost invisible variations here, I'm talking about 'obviously has potential', and 'obviously looks totally wrong'. This is frequently something that can be seen by eye real easily, but is very, very hard to program into a computer. I wish I had a chart example off hand for you, but I don't.

Originally posted by tx_ches

Jim, what do you mean when you say "our eyes would say the geometry is not good." How can geometry be bad?

I'm not convinced the algo's are using the same median lines as roofer all the time. On the QQQ's, I drew 2 other sets before I saw roofer's set and even after I drew another set. So all together there were 4 sets with lines going into his areas. The algos could easily have programmed in 2 of them without using the more minor swing low that roofer used.

How heavily do you think the algos rely on measured moves? It seems like I see a lot of median line sets that capture a measured move. I wonder if that is what the algos key on when it is looking like they key on a median line set?