Jump to content



Photo

The time to hit a grand slam was w/3 runners on base


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 spielchekr

spielchekr

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,104 posts

Posted 26 October 2008 - 01:23 AM

The Bears struck out, and the Bulls are at bat but way behind. Moral: never let football and basketball players try to play baseball. That's what the Cubs are for. Maybe :D (trivia question, are these teams named for those guys in the Chi-town trading pits?)

On 10/10, I pointed out this fib barrier:
The Fibonacci barrier for total slope pitch deviations, DJI since 1929

On 10/19, I revealed quite a bit more about that barrier day: the test of a rare, coordinated price convergence for the 61.8% barriers of moving average summations for 20days/50days/100days/200days:
The "Good" Crash

Here is where those charts stand now.
Posted Image
I think the majority of technicians tend to look for divergences between tails/wicks and indicators that are computed from the candle body (candle closing price). That's always seemed to me like comparing apples to oranges, and if you happen to look these charts that way, you will not see the divergences. But I'll leave it up to you to view them as you prefer.

Oscillator charts like those above are fine and dandy for getting a sense of diverging action, but they don't give me enough information. I want to know the upcoming prices where benchmark lines will be hit by the indicator, and what the price structure actually looks like. So in this weekend issue, I'm going to show them to you this one time.

In the chart below, keep in mind that these horizontal lines fluctuate from one day to the next. In other words, this chart is good for Monday only. The blue horizontals show the prices where 61.8% momentum retracement of the 1929 crash exist for Monday. In decending and respective order, they are for the moving average slope summations 200, 100, 50 and 20. The gold horizontals show where 38.2% momentum retracement of the 1929 crash exist for Monday. Once again, in decending and respective order, they are for the moving average slope summations 200, 100, 50 and 20. What you can see here is the strata of two fib levels (61.8% and 38.2%) for the four conventional time frames (the 3 base-runners and the batter if you didn't get that by now). The rest are the other fib levels for moving average summations caught in the scuffle. And for the ultra-bears, I've taken the horizontals all the way down to where the highest 100% retracement of 1929 momentum resides: the 20-day moving average summation at 6535... too low to show on this chart, but now you know where 1929 crash redux lives on Monday.

Consider for a moment that exactly two Fridays ago, the blue horizontals for 20/50/100/200 were all bunched together at essentially the same price, which was for all intents and purposes the price of that Friday's close. So here we are two Fridays later, and price is back to where it was (well, less than 1% lower anyway). So why are certain indicators ascending (including mine)? Because the lower strata (blue horizontals) has decompressed and expanded downward. Sometimes this phenomenon manifests itself as a consolidation before a continued move. Other times, it manifests itself as a confirmation of an inflection point (change from convex to concave or visa versa) on a curve. This is perhaps a very good point in time and price to ponder the implications of rejecting one circumstance to accept the other.

Posted Image

So let's zoom in a little for a better look (note: the zoomed chart drops the lowest blue horizontal due to sizing format). A retest of that 61.8% unified barrier (20/50/100/200) from two weeks ago now requires price to stretch all the way down to the last bear market lows to take them all out. Two weeks ago, it could have taken them all out in one fell swoop. Had it done so then, what would your expectations have been for the outcome? Now that those cards have been reshuffled and we have a new hand, how does it compare to the last one? Notice the recognition of this particular strata transition zone in the final candle by the tests it made. And keep in mind that until each blue horizontal gets taken out, there is a price divergence for the respective time period each one represents. Of course, the final verdict is left to the jury, and it has adjourned until Monday. But one thing is very clear to me here... we have arrived at a spectacular pivot point. Some will accept it, others will reject it. I can't say who will win, because I don't have divine info. But newly enriched bears have fresh coffers of money. And sidelined cash has had its buying power re-inflated to a level well above that of the market double-top. Two well-equipped armies. Interesting times.

Posted Image

And again I repeat, this chart represents Monday only. My summations include all moving averages within a time period, so these lines expand and contract (they are dynamic) from one day to the next. The exact prices become obsolete for Tuesday (consider the expansion over the past two weeks to understand what I mean). And in closing, even if you think that my particular oscillators are bullcrap (or bearcrap if you prefer), you may now at least gained another perspective of how your typical oscillators work. My intent is to present the situation, your job is to choose. Best of trading to you.

#2 spielchekr

spielchekr

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,104 posts

Posted 26 October 2008 - 09:53 AM

Here's something to consider, if you happen to subscribe to the premise that the markets are efficient like this. Back in late December, the actual moving averages were bundled tightly together (the 100 was in there too, I just happen to think of it as the least important of the four and omitted it from mention). This time, it's their negative slope deviations that were bundled tightly together. Comparing apples to oranges, am I? Yes, but since when are bottoms anything like mirror-images of tops? So I like to investigate trace evidence of market-efficient operations, especially "corraling" of both moving averages and/or their resultant conditions. Corraling is what we had on December 28th and again on October 10th. One cut through and below, the other didn't. So after the failed attempt to efficiently break down below the October 10th bundle, there are two obvious choices here (making a setup for the major pivot point I mentioned). (1), Allow the slope deviations to decompress (as they now have) and attempt to divide and conquer each with successively lower prices, one at a time and into positive divergences on the shorter time frames (the lower strata at present). Or (2), respect the top of the 61.8% retracement strata at this point (per Friday's close). Either one is capable of causing a very swift directional move this week IMHO, and Friday has liely set this up for such an occurance right away. So whether you're a bear or bull, if you're thinking swift move, I can agree with you. Choice #1 seems about as possible as #2, but is a better recipe for a terminal attempt at the 2002 lows than an October 10th breakdown would have been. Should that transpire nevertheless, I would keenly watch for signs of (further?) accumulation in that zone.

#3 spielchekr

spielchekr

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,104 posts

Posted 27 October 2008 - 11:57 AM

8205, the bottommost of the 38.2% horizontals, is successfully re-tested during 1st 15 minutes of the trading day, and holds.
Posted Image

Edited by spielchekr, 27 October 2008 - 12:04 PM.


#4 efretty

efretty

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 67 posts

Posted 27 October 2008 - 12:53 PM

8205, the bottommost of the 38.2% horizontals, is successfully re-tested during 1st 15 minutes of the trading day, and holds.
Posted Image

Spielchekr,
Thank you for all your work. If your "Rule of Thumb" appilies , we must close higher than the 10:45 price to be bullish for a trend change.Am I reading this correctly?

#5 spielchekr

spielchekr

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,104 posts

Posted 27 October 2008 - 02:13 PM

efretty: I'd like to see that, but for a much better read on trend confirmation after an inflection, I'd turn to the e-wave guys. I know one guy in particular I prefer to turn to. All he needs to do is drop by at TT a little more frequently.

#6 spielchekr

spielchekr

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,104 posts

Posted 28 October 2008 - 04:54 AM

And so they chose what was behind door number two... terminal move.
Mystery solved.
Posted Image

Edited by spielchekr, 28 October 2008 - 04:54 AM.


#7 spielchekr

spielchekr

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,104 posts

Posted 28 October 2008 - 01:51 PM

Re-reading this post, and for the record, I meant door #1 (as in choice #1 terminal move in the post above). I was being too cute with words...my apologies.

And so they chose what was behind door number two... terminal move.
Mystery solved.
Posted Image