Yes there is. I'm not necessarily an Ord fan, because I'm busy with Wyckoff; however, he has several indicators and software to display it. As for other platforms, I only know of code for Amibroker that shows the Ord Volume Indicator. "http://www.amibroker.com/library/detail.php?id=1018"
Very nice charts. What settings are you using? Maybe we can practice some PnF counts. I'll have to look for some good patterns to work with.
I'm interested in your input on a PnF calculation for the Emini S&P 500 Futures daily. Could you show us how you think it should be done?
Here's one of my PnF intraday 5 minute charts for today, but I'm not sure if PnF counts could help on intraday.
Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).
I don't think your presence is disruptive at all. I think that if you have knowledge that can help others succeed in this business and are willing to share it then that is a good thing.
I'm the original poster of this thread and I admit that I am not a Wyckoff historian, or expert. My experience with Wyckoff is purely through the chart reading course that Dr. Gary Dayton teaches. I think, but am not certain, he used to go by the name Eiger on TL. That course was an eye opener for me. I've actually taken it twice. No, it does not make me successful, but there is a foundation regarding the reading of a chart that can be beneficial to any trader.
The intention of the thread was to help myself as well as others regarding this method as taught by Gary. The ability to trade a chart without a cluttering of indicators is a powerful thing. Or, using this method with other pieces of other methods can be powerful as well.
I can't help but sense some dissatisfaction/annoyance from you regarding the addition of terms such as springs, or the use of things such as the Weis Wave because it isn't organic Wyckoff. I don't think there is anything wrong with being true to an original method just like being true in any craft. If one wants to do woodworking only with hand tools and no power tools, that's great. But things can and do change, and that change can be of benefit without damaging the spirit of the original concepts. Personally, I find the Wyckoff some what complicated with the phases of accumulation and distribution. Trying to figure out all of the tests and what phase we are in etc. The market doesn't always fit the schematic in a clear way.
As far as the term Spring goes, it may not be Wyckoff, but it seems to be a useful tool from what I've seen. Maybe Wyckoff had another name for it. I don't know. I do know that I've seen the concept work often and if one has the balls to take a trade at or near that location the risk is at it's minimal with the reward being much greater.
I think this business, at least for me, is very difficult. It doesn't really need to be. I think it's the psychology that makes it so, but if there anything that can be done to simplify or improve one chances of success, I think there is nothing wrong with that.
If the use of the term "Wyckoff Trading Method" upsets you, we can have the name of the thread changed to "Wyckoffesque Trading method". I'm not being a smart ass. I'm serious. Personally, I don't care about the history or the spirit, or what is organic or not. I'd just like to be successful at this business.
I say post whatever you want, or post in the thread you started. It's all good.
The following 3 users say Thank You to David_R for this post:
Yea, DbPhoenix. Stick arround. I try to be a Wyckoffian fundamentalist, but we all could learn a lot from you. We can also learn from each other. Please be patient with us, because we all have different backgrounds and different view points.
The following 2 users say Thank You to StockJock for this post:
I'm certainly not speaking for DBP but I think if you want his input its better to go over to traders laboratory. I also don't think he uses point and figure charting in his trading. I guess he isn't as much of a purist as he pretends
The following 2 users say Thank You to YertleTurtle for this post:
I'd like his input if he want's to share it. I also find it much more useful if people that have insight post charts and even annotate or explain them. I can certainly understand the concept of "teaching a man to fish instead....blah blah", but this is not a trading room with trades being called out. I don't think when someone asks a question that they should always be directed to the 400 page book. It most certainly may be of value to read the section that pertains to the question etc., but a marked up chart explaining/answering the question can be a of great value especially if it's something that presents itself often.
The following user says Thank You to David_R for this post:
Thank you for your post. It's always nice to feel wanted, though, in this case, I can't help you. I'm neither upset nor annoyed, but you're trying to reconcile a half-dozen different interpretations of something which you have no interest in reading, much less studying. This is a recipe for failure. And while I don't enjoy watching people fail (I've seen plenty in twenty years), there's little to nothing I can do to stop them.
As to terminology and hand tools and power tools and so forth, none of that is really pertinent. What matters most is an understanding of the forces of demand and supply. It's not about schematics or "laws" or any of the other layers of complexity which have been added for you or by you. It's about a level of simplicity that is foreign to what you're wrestling with. Nor does it have much to do with psychology. It has much more to do with learning to trade in real time, not via hindsight charts, "marked-up or otherwise", which I suspect has been your primary mode of instruction.
As regards charts, though, I will point out, even though it's a hindsight chart, that the trader who posted the ES chart earlier could have profited handsomely by applying a knowledge of demand and supply and trend to his chart. This trade had nothing to do with "springs" and shakeouts. In fact, it began long before the subject of shakeouts arose. The first entry was at 0530EST, even if the trader wasn't at his computer (the trades are there whether the trader is or not). The second was at 0900. The third was at 1020. A familiarity with waves and supply lines and the MAEs of retracements (50%) would have kept him in the trade all the way to the bottom. And while I agree that what one calls a particular feature, like "shakeouts", is not particularly important, it is absolutely important that the trader understand exactly what buyers and sellers are trying to do so that he may know whether to go along with it or trade counter to it. The focus on bars which is characteristic of vendors is misplaced as it is of no importance whatsoever.
I do wish you well. You seem to be sincere about all this. Perhaps you will eventually decide to study Wyckoff's own work.
The following user says Thank You to DbPhoenix for this post: