You have no idea how bullish this is

... in the bear market rally sense of the word. This weekly chart shows diagonal price supports tangent to closing prices at critical momentum points (refer to tags of the blue dashed line).



Besides that really messy chart, I've been busy all evening updating my par-trend envelope charts to recalibrate EXPANDED ENVELOPES. Mostly on the 15 and 60 minute charts (SPX, NDX, RUT). Example:



This type of momentum expasion on the intraday is of first-wave character, and is what is needed to precede this same type of pendulum swinging within the daily envelopes. I've been through this mass-updating of par-trend envelope charts enough times now to recognize the signs that spill over into the daily momentum charts. Having this intraday stuff happen right at the daily 200ma's pendulum tag is no coincidence. That tag had been left unfulfilled until now, long after the 20, 50 and 100 day charts had hit their envelope bottoms. They've been biding time waiting for this one to catch up. (copied and pasted from my previous thread):

Wednesday's close nailed the reciprocative 200ma slope pitch (aka pendulum endpoint tag) from May of last year.



That May 2007 momentum high benchmark, BTW, is virtually 61.8% of the bull market's initiation 200ma slope pitch high (and the second-highest of that bull market. A perfect sympathetic echo. I've simply calibrated the Fibonacci envelopes to show that 2003 high as 161.8% of the 2007 high (therefore, the 2007 high is 61.8% of the 2003 high). Make sense?



For those who don't easily grasp a "wavy" zero line, here's a chart showing these peaks on a horizontal zero line chart. Unforunately, I can't show the Fib grid relationship since this program doesn't snap the Fib points to anything except price. But you can see (and scale for yourself) the reciprocal distances from the zero line between the 2007 peak and 2008 trough.

[/quote]

So what are my thoughts about the shorting ban snafu? It was totally unnecessary, except for the fact that it was precisely timed to be implemented right here to make certain people appear, in the near future, like THEY made this rally happen (read politics, oops, policy). They know that the market isn't going to stand for it, and they're already capitulating to the market makers. It's not meant or intended to last. This rally will NOT be on account of them, in will be in spite of them. It's a technical thing, and they'll want to bag all of the credit for it. You're just going to have to rub their bowlsh*t posturing out of your eyes and get with the program. Unless you want to be a funnymental trader, of course.

Edited by spielchekr, 19 September 2008 - 11:59 PM.

Wow ! --- sometimes, the TA talent on this board makes my head spin (and I wont pretend to understand all the physics here, but if I understand correctly, that wavy big white line is heading right to the 1290-1310 zone that I see as the top of corrective wave "C" up yet to come.) Re your concluding statement re objective price patterns -- not state policy -- determining outcomes, couldnt agree more. In fact, earlier this year GS circulated a client memo forecasting 1160 as the downside objective of this bear market. Coincidence ? I dont think so.

Beta, thanks, but let's call my work something like "astute observation" at best. "Talent" is the art of getting good actionable results from whatever observations one follows. I've got work to do on that frontier.

Anyhow, here's an SPX weekly 12,26,9 MACD chart, with both standard and par-trend MACD plots. As you see, the par-trend MACD has been favoring the positive side of the standard MACD. I placed crosshairs at the last juncture where par-trend front-ran the standard. Actually, the red crosshairs are technically at the week prior to the actual period for the standard MACD crossover, so I'm even cutting the standard MACD some slack.



Here's the short answer for par-trend moving averages vs. standard (simple or exponential) moving averages. Either a simple or exponential moving average will account for only a single moving average for any given period. Think about it... an exponential moving average will simply discount the effect of time passage upon a single moving average. So essentially with those moving averages, you're only seeing an object (in this case, a given period of time) at a selected point from a cross-section position. Par-trend instead takes into account all moving averages for any given period. That way, one sees the forest (again, a period of time) rather than the tree. That makes them much less prone to tweaks and manipulations, because singular moving averages often become distracting billboards instead of directional signposts on the Trend Turnpike, IMHO.

Wow ! --- sometimes, the TA talent on this board makes my head spin

I looked at these charts and knew I was not mentally ready to tackle them.
So I switched on NOVA and watched their program explaining Einstein's theory of relativity and how it progressed thru the ages from Newton to Michael Faraday's theory of electromagnetism.
Who knew that you couldn't go faster than light but time would just slow down instead.

Now I'm ready to look at these charts.

Wait. Let me get a cocktail first.