NexusFi: Find Your Edge


Home Menu

 





Like a turtle to his balcony...


Discussion in Trading Journals

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one GaryD with 1,625 posts (688 thanks)
    2. looks_two josh with 67 posts (106 thanks)
    3. looks_3 greenr with 51 posts (53 thanks)
    4. looks_4 Deucalion with 28 posts (77 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one Deucalion with 2.8 thanks per post
    2. looks_two josh with 1.6 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 greenr with 1 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 GaryD with 0.4 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 225,981 views
    2. thumb_up 1,158 thanks given
    3. group 36 followers
    1. forum 1,905 posts
    2. attach_file 1,043 attachments




 
Search this Thread

Like a turtle to his balcony...

  #351 (permalink)
 
GaryD's Avatar
 GaryD 
Orlando, Florida
 
Experience: None
Platform: shoes
Trading: happy
Posts: 6,462 since May 2011


josh View Post
If you mean post 343, then yes it makes sense. But earlier you mentioned about short covering. This is a Dalton thing (I think) and I do not really subscribe to it, though I do see some of the logic in it. In his theory, a short covering profile like this (which, given that probably several were short from the last two prior days) means more downside to come. But the way it finished, I don't think it would qualify, since there was range extension up at the close, but maybe I'm wrong. Either way, that way of thinking does not factor into my decisions very much, if at all. Maybe I'm biased against it because it's so pattern recognition oriented; I see people everywhere talking about 'B' and 'p' and 'b' shaped profiles, and it kind of turns me off. I have seen too many counter examples to put much faith in labeling a 'p' profile after a down day a "short covering rally."

But in post 343 you said that "nearly all the volume was below the POC" when in fact nearly all the volume was within about 10 ticks higher and 20 ticks lower than the POC. I think what you mean is that there is a long tail below the big fat distribution centered around 92.80. In the graphic below, you can see that D, E, and F period lows were all around the A period high. The open was a few ticks off the low, and the fact that A was never again traded indicates a very strong demand. Competition was high for prices below 92.60, and you only got them if you took the small window of opportunity that existed for only a few minutes at the open. Competition means low volume and small windows of time, just like when something is on sale, it doesn't last long because inventory is bought and prices go back to normal.

An open that low near the LOD, D, E, and F not being able to get lower, and value established higher means it is VERY unlikely (in my book, maybe 10%) that a low like that will be revisited again in the day. So, all a good recipe for an auction higher to see if more value can be found up there. It was a good play, great job getting in there.



Josh, keeping in mind we both know I am at MP101...

This is what I saw as the "majority of volume"




That did not cause me to want to take the trade, as any version of MP has not had a place on my screens for years until lately, and I am not interested in being a trading guinea pig any more than I have to...

But because the majority of my learning energy is going to MP, I am trying to integrate the charts at least, see something visual and try to see if it agrees or disagrees with the other thougts I am having. That prompted the comment recently that "I know nothing", market-profile-overdose-induced-analysis-paralysis (MPOIAP, just in case).

I saw in dalton's book a ratio of above vs below POC, but the GOM indicator does not seem to include that text. I was going to buy the fin-algo today, but got sidetracked. I think it did offer that display option.

But back to the close long, my confirmation was the high volume bar test of the low of the mid-to-late RTH channel. I did not eneter at the test, I entered when it came back up to the most recent high pivot.






Meanwhile, prior to that I had just been watching, and posted on the VWAP thread a question of what the MP/POC crew saw.



Did not get a response.




Chatted on Skype with Ryan about it, got off topic somewhat, then defaulted to what little understanding I think I have of that style.



Or, short answer; luck? lol!



Josh I am really having fun with this. Hope you don't get offended.

Started this thread Reply With Quote

Can you help answer these questions
from other members on NexusFi?
Deepmoney LLM
Elite Quantitative GenAI/LLM
NT7 Indicator Script Troubleshooting - Camarilla Pivots
NinjaTrader
Exit Strategy
NinjaTrader
Online prop firm The Funded Trader (TFT) going under?
Traders Hideout
ZombieSqueeze
Platforms and Indicators
 
  #352 (permalink)
 
GaryD's Avatar
 GaryD 
Orlando, Florida
 
Experience: None
Platform: shoes
Trading: happy
Posts: 6,462 since May 2011

On a higher timeframe I am still sticking with the 89.30ish major.

Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #353 (permalink)
 
josh's Avatar
 josh 
Georgia, US
Legendary Market Wizard
 
Experience: None
Platform: SC
Broker: Denali+Rithmic
Trading: ES, NQ, YM
Posts: 6,216 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 6,752
Thanks Received: 18,136


OK I see. If the mode of the distribution is the delineation, then yes there is more volume below than above. But looking at the entire distribution from high to low, it is clear that there is more volume at the top than the bottom, and that is what is more relevant to me. It says to me that as the day has progressed, higher prices have been accepted as more fair. It says that lower prices are unfairly low. And perhaps more importantly, it says that there has not been an auction higher to test whether higher prices will be considered unfairly high, or whether they will be accepted as fair. If a store sells an item that sells out quickly, it likely raises the price to test the market higher. If it finds that higher prices sell sufficient inventory and these higher prices become established as fair for some time, what is more likely to happen next--the store raises prices again to test the market's acceptance or rejection of higher prices, or that it will lower prices to those that have already been determined as too low? Well, barring some unforeseen shift in consumer sentiment, I would think higher prices are likely to be seen to test out the market's willingness to pay them. It doesn't mean that it will continue higher, it could just as well auction lower. But the preceding logic, and experience says that it is more likely to continue higher. No guarantees, but your own trading logic based on experience also said, "would rather be long up here than short."


GaryD View Post
I saw in dalton's book a ratio of above vs below POC, but the GOM indicator does not seem to include that text. I was going to buy the fin-algo today, but got sidetracked. I think it did offer that display option.

This is TPO count. It is not used very much anymore. A read in MoM on this will show why; he uses logic relating to TPO count and locals .. yes, those dinosaurs which are near extinction and play zero role in the global marketplace. I still laugh when I read comments like "locals are selling 800" ... 800, ha, funny when 2 million traded today. Even the revised text for the CME MP handbook says this: "Keep in mind, though, that certain ideas such as the initial balance, the TPO count and the kinds of range development are going to become less important..."

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #354 (permalink)
 
josh's Avatar
 josh 
Georgia, US
Legendary Market Wizard
 
Experience: None
Platform: SC
Broker: Denali+Rithmic
Trading: ES, NQ, YM
Posts: 6,216 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 6,752
Thanks Received: 18,136


GaryD View Post
Josh I am really having fun with this. Hope you don't get offended.

Why would I get offended? We're just a couple of guys talking markets man. I wouldn't be up chatting if it was not fun and interesting to me.

My question about your long is this--when you saw the high volume come in (that you circled), were you already thinking that you should be long? If so, why not buy right then? If the fairest price is 92.80, and you can buy at a discount of 92.70, why not do so, and why instead buy above the fairest price at 92.84? Just asking, and we have some differences in trading styles no doubt so I'm asking from one style to another. I could very well ask myself the same question today on an early long that I took, so this is a learning process for me as well, and talking through it with someone is very valuable I think.

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #355 (permalink)
 
GaryD's Avatar
 GaryD 
Orlando, Florida
 
Experience: None
Platform: shoes
Trading: happy
Posts: 6,462 since May 2011


josh View Post
Why would I get offended? We're just a couple of guys talking markets man. I wouldn't be up chatting if it was not fun and interesting to me.

My question about your long is this--when you saw the high volume come in (that you circled), were you already thinking that you should be long? If so, why not buy right then? If the fairest price is 92.80, and you can buy at a discount of 92.70, why not do so, and why instead buy above the fairest price at 92.84? Just asking, and we have some differences in trading styles no doubt so I'm asking from one style to another. I could very well ask myself the same question today on an early long that I took, so this is a learning process for me as well, and talking through it with someone is very valuable I think.

Because, at 92.70 I was guessing. It was anyone's close. At 92.84 I had confirmation, and took a higher risk:reward based on a higher expectancy.

Some trades are guesses more than others.

Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #356 (permalink)
 
GaryD's Avatar
 GaryD 
Orlando, Florida
 
Experience: None
Platform: shoes
Trading: happy
Posts: 6,462 since May 2011


josh View Post
Why would I get offended?.

Because I have taken a very casuul and silly approach to my discussions lately. It is serious, no doubt. If I am down $1k, that was our food, utilities, etc. yet I seem to joke about the whole thing. To me it is fun, and if I had to put into one sentence why I almost imploded last year, it is because I would not allow it to be.

But that sarcastic, turtle-fucking, 50 contract shorting on a CNBC bullshit article, laughing-at-a-loss approach; combined with a very serious, business-minded, analytical, driven personality, seems to work for me. I stopped questioning it, and I see it in real dollars.

Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #357 (permalink)
 
josh's Avatar
 josh 
Georgia, US
Legendary Market Wizard
 
Experience: None
Platform: SC
Broker: Denali+Rithmic
Trading: ES, NQ, YM
Posts: 6,216 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 6,752
Thanks Received: 18,136


GaryD View Post
Because, at 92.70 I was guessing. It was anyone's close. At 92.84 I had confirmation, and took a higher risk:reward based on a higher expectancy.

Some trades are guesses more than others.

I see, ok. In the end they are all guesses, which is the hard thing for people like me and you (you have talked before about how everything was calculated to the T on a spreadsheet, nothing was uncertain, etc.) who prefer (as most people do I guess) exactness, which is of course detrimental to us traders.

Reply With Quote
  #358 (permalink)
 
GaryD's Avatar
 GaryD 
Orlando, Florida
 
Experience: None
Platform: shoes
Trading: happy
Posts: 6,462 since May 2011


josh View Post
I see, ok. In the end they are all guesses, which is the hard thing for people like me and you (you have talked before about how everything was calculated to the T on a spreadsheet, nothing was uncertain, etc.) who prefer (as most people do I guess) exactness, which is of course detrimental to us traders.

No. Therein resideded exactness




Which way was it going? Down was almost ruled out in that moment.

Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #359 (permalink)
 
josh's Avatar
 josh 
Georgia, US
Legendary Market Wizard
 
Experience: None
Platform: SC
Broker: Denali+Rithmic
Trading: ES, NQ, YM
Posts: 6,216 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 6,752
Thanks Received: 18,136


GaryD View Post
No. Therein resideded exactness

Which way was it going? Down was almost ruled out in that moment.

By "therein resided exactness" I guess you mean at the circled area, 92.70? But you said a couple of posts ago that "at 92.70 it was anybody's close" -- and definitely it was almost ruled out, but nothing's for sure, and for me anyway, I like 100% probabilities much more than 90% ones by nature But in trading I have to live in a much lower realm than even 90%.

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #360 (permalink)
 
GaryD's Avatar
 GaryD 
Orlando, Florida
 
Experience: None
Platform: shoes
Trading: happy
Posts: 6,462 since May 2011



josh View Post
I see, ok. In the end they are all guesses, which is the hard thing for people like me and you (you have talked before about how everything was calculated to the T on a spreadsheet, nothing was uncertain, etc.) who prefer (as most people do I guess) exactness, which is of course detrimental to us traders.

There is value in all that calculating to a T. It offers a mathematical understanding of movement. But a heavy focus on those extremes causes us to try to predcit the future without listening to what is the present.

Started this thread Reply With Quote




Last Updated on August 5, 2013


© 2024 NexusFi™, s.a., All Rights Reserved.
Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama City, Panama, Ph: +507 833-9432 (Panama and Intl), +1 888-312-3001 (USA and Canada)
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice. There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
About Us - Contact Us - Site Rules, Acceptable Use, and Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy - Downloads - Top
no new posts