85 replies to this topic

[SilentOne]

Please disregard the last two charts as they were attached in error. It is extremely frustrating to post and edit on this site during a trading day.

Edited by SilentOne, 12 March 2009 - 11:50 AM.

[SilentOne]

LeroyB3,

Major mea culpa! It's time for me to bone up on my Hurst and reread some of the course notes.

I actually thought Hurst used calendar days in his charts. That's the way they appear anyway with the gaps between bars that I thought he counted. I use trading days too so it's not a huge deal, but just wanted to check.

I have been so focused on counting cycles for crude oil, gold etc., I forgot that in fact Hurst did use a calendar count in his cycles work. I have been using thinkorswim charts which show trading days of course and not calendar days. It saves a lot of time not having to count manually. I derived the cycles for oil for example by tracking trading days (eg. 7, 14 and 28 day TD cycles for crude) and when I have shown these cycles in terms of weeks, I was dividing by five (5 TDs/ week). Doh!!

So nothing changes per my cycle periods for oil, I just have to work out the expression of these daily cycle periods in terms of Hursts original framework.

Sorry about the confusion I may have caused.

So to summarize crude oil cycles that I track:

88/90 week
44/45 week
22/23 week
11/11.5 week which in fact was derived from (56 TD cycle, but actually 79 - 80 calendar days)
5/5.5 week which in fact was derived from (28 TD cycle, but actually 39 - 40 calendar days)
2.5/2.75 week which in fact was derived from (14 TD cycle, but actually 19 - 20 calendar days)
1.25 week which in fact was derived from (7 TD cycle, but actually 10 calendar days)

I'm very sorry for any confusion. And hey other than LeroyB3, where were the Hurst enthusiasts out there to correct my faux pas!

cheers,

john

Edited by SilentOne, 14 March 2009 - 03:46 PM.

[SilentOne]

And of course all these charts have to be relabelled where periods are referenced in days (The weekly ones are fine). So for example crude bottomed into the first Hurst 20 day low (2.5 - 2.75 week cycle low) of a new bull cycle. Originally I was referencing it as a 14 day cycle, merely because I was counting trading days. And of course the FLD labels should now read 20 day (2.5-2.75 wk) and 40 day (5 - 5.5 wk) FLDs.



And as I have been explaining in recent days, if the cycles for crude have turned bullish, then crude has seen a major nest of lows here late Feb. The larger cycles 2.5 on up to the 88/90 week cycles are pointing hard up. THAT's why I have to be bullish here.

cheers,

john

Edited by SilentOne, 14 March 2009 - 04:00 PM.

[GOOSE]

John, glad that got cleared up. I was a little confused because I started learning about the FLD's and he seemed to count calender days, but I thought that I had that wrong. So if I'm understanding right, we should have 40 weeks or so up on oil? The one thing that is confusing is the S&P cycle since it has been going down since it had its 4.5 year low. There must be other larger cycles at work. I'm hoping that things become clearer as the course goes on. At the moment it seems like I'll never be able to keep it all straight. Thanks

[Echo]

John, May I suggest that current Hurst practitioners continue to use TRADING DAYS in our discussions of shorter cycles rather than calender days. Airedale/Bob always did his posts and discussions using trading days, and several other Hurst enthusiasts have continued in that tradition. Introducing calender day discussion at this point in time would only serve to totally confusion any future discussions and posts. Let's all stick with trading days, please! Echo

[SilentOne]

hi Echo,

I don't plan to change the way I am doing the crude oil Hurst cycles. But I will make the distinction in daily counts.



Next week is the big test for this crude oil phasing.

cheers,

john

Edited by SilentOne, 15 March 2009 - 09:56 AM.

[LeroyB3]

In case anyone might be interested, here are the 6 most likely trading day cycles that the scientific methods provide for USO based on the best Bartels scores: 179 trading days - Bartels of 91.37 39 trading days - Bartels of 89.32 81 trading days - Bartels of 82.10 10 trading days - Bartels of 81.29 24 trading days - Bartels of 81.03 45 trading days - Bartels of 75.60 Silent's 14 trading day cycle isn't listed, but he's been dominating with it so who really cares. Best, LB

[swanstkdh]

Can you do that with Natural Gas???

[LeroyB3]

I only have access to UNG, but here are the results: 95 Trading Days - Bartels of 94.90 26 Trading Days - Bartels of 78.38 47 Trading Days - Bartels of 72.20 40 Trading Days - Bartels of 68.71 11 Trading Days - Bartels of 68.55 Bartels scores go up to 100 with the highest scores supposedly being the best cycles. Best, LB

[Lysis]

John, Congrats on several gutsy calls.