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.

I see a tweet from street_insider about eurozone concerns so that might have scared the mkt.

if that intraday low holds, that pullback puts it in a perfect position for a little 1.27 dbs

ES up 25 off that low at today's high. Just as I suspected yesterday. It's set up to hit that 1320 level by day's end, but that's just icing on the cake, it has done as much or more than I expected for today. Sometimes, I truly feel, they are so predictable it's just crazy.

I have two sublevels coming from the intraday, and one wider level coming from the higher timeframe. Let's just look at all that as one big level from higher, and that range is 1318.25-1322. And it's almost there already!

Wait, it was rocketing up there and O'Bummer started yapping on TV and it started to come off fast. Let's see if that's a checkback to send it up, or if he's going to spook them.

I think they were expecting him to say the issue was resolved, and he's letting them down...

not quite...but very close...

Back to a .382/.447 overlap at line, and up it jumps. Let's see if it can resume its rocket run now that the maniac is off.

Didn't even get that post read once I hit 'post' and it exploded right to the area! It did it. How amazing, and how 'non-surprising'.

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?