In at the birth

[blancspa]

Probably wont be an issue for you blancspa, but another piece of crap like that and you're on my ignore list.

Stay small. Stay quiet. And learn. And KTFQ.

Well here we go again.
Another pop at me mate and you will find similarities between blitzkrieg and bowling, kapisz?
you ve been poppin at me for some time already...
take care

 

[TheBramble]

Well here we go again.
Another pop at me mate and you will find similarities between blitzkrieg and bowling, kapisz?
you ve been poppin at me for some time already...
take care

snuff

 

[Mr. Charts]

Heard about those movies.

 

[Calinor]

You could define the start of a trend as being three consecutive highs or lows, which would be fair enough, but that doesn't necessarily mean the "trend" won't fail shortly afterwards and thus negate the definition.

Again Timsk is right, because this comes down to definitions. But when I first read the birth I thought Barjon was looking for the very first indication that a new trend may be coming. The birth to me is the very point from which it then goes up, and doesn't return. If I look at the Dow, 10th March (he actual low I have on the 6th) I have an up candle which almost swallows up the previous 5 days of candles (wicks excluded). Now that is a pretty strong up move considering we are in a down trend, and might be a first indication that something could be changing. Of course I am aware something similar happened on 28th Oct, and although that one went up a bit, it didn't follow through. Were there any other signs that something mgiht be wrong with the downtrend, and a new uptrend might be beginning? Do you mean three swing highs Mr Charts, or just candle highs?

 

[martinew]

What's wrong with a double bottom / double top or Higher Low / Lower high and/or failure to breach at major key levels of supply and demand?

Of course, what''s important here is not the cliché textbook pattern setups, but understanding what it means when price fails to breach, does breach, how it acts at these major levels and what the failure or successful break means, thus, confirming (or not) the reversal into an opposing trend.

Plus which participants will move this market around into a new trend (CB's nd HF's lastly followed by IB's and the herd) so timeframe is vital to be in tune with those aforementioned and always considered when it comes to major reversals in and out of new trends.

Intent too... and context... Economics... Current major news... recent volatility... upcoming news... manipulation for better prices to offload/buy...

No point saying HH, HL, HH etc without context... may as well just use 2 combined HMA's and trade the crossovers and be done with it!


doh, cover blown! citybulls.com ftw!

 

[TheBramble]

What's wrong with a double bottom / double top or Higher Low / Lower high and/or failure to breach at major key levels of supply and demand?

Nothing. But none of them in and of themselves are either unique to the start of a trend nor necessarily a mandatory component of them.

Of course, what''s important here is not the cliché textbook pattern setups, but understanding what it means when price fails to breach, does breach, how it acts at these major levels and what the failure or successful break means, thus, confirming (or not) the reversal into an opposing trend.

Again, all well and good, but nothing you’re saying here can be isolated as only occurring at the birth of a trend. These reactions of either failure or success (whatever that means) at major levels don’t necessarily initiate a reversal of trend.

Plus which participants will move this market around into a new trend (CB's nd HF's lastly followed by IB's and the herd) so timeframe is vital to be in tune with those aforementioned and always considered when it comes to major reversals in and out of new trends.

’Timeframe is vital’ – you mean viewing the action across multiple TFs. If so, I agree. A change in trend starts at the very lowest of TFs. But then the question becomes, at what level of granularity do you allow yourself to be convinced you have a trend? DO you allow for the fact you could, by whatever definition YOU choose, have a trend in the 5 min but a range in the Daily?

Intent too... and context... Economics... Current major news... recent volatility... upcoming news... manipulation for better prices to offload/buy...

Stream-of-consciousness. None of which in any way can be used to determine with any useful degree of accuracy the timing of the birth of a new trend.

No point saying HH, HL, HH etc without context... may as well just use 2 combined HMA's and trade the crossovers and be done with it!

Baby and bath water. We’re looking for what factors can be considered. HH and HL (or 3 consec up bars LOL) could well be a useful clue or starting point.

You’ve not really contributed positively in my view, just thrown in a load of ‘market factors’ which although important to genral trading, serve only to muddy the waters at the level of specificity barjon is seeking to develop.



Taking the pee with the avatar. Reckon the mods will let you stay?

 

[martinew]

Nothing. But none of them in and of themselves are either unique to the start of a trend nor necessarily a mandatory component of them.

No, true, they are not mandatory, but I thought Jon's goal was to find the start... in at the birth, not when its already started. If you are going to wait long enough for say '3 HH/HL's', you may as well use an MA crossover and you aren't getting in at the start.

Again, all well and good, but nothing you’re saying here can be isolated as only occurring at the birth of a trend. These reactions of either failure or success (whatever that means) at major levels don’t necessarily initiate a reversal of trend.

They are high occuring reasons, they happen earlier (the birth and death) that 3 green bars or 3 HH's and HL's and happen at key levels where the reversal into a new trend is the most likely to happen, and there will never be a 100% sign, its all statistics.

’Timeframe is vital’ – you mean viewing the action across multiple TFs. If so, I agree. A change in trend starts at the very lowest of TFs. But then the question becomes, at what level of granularity do you allow yourself to be convinced you have a trend? DO you allow for the fact you could, by whatever definition YOU choose, have a trend in the 5 min but a range in the Daily?

Trends are started and finished by those with the most control. CB's and HF's, tuning in with those and their preominant TF is vital, so yes, multi TF's but only 2 or 3 (240m/daily).

Stream-of-consciousness. None of which in any way can be used to determine with any useful degree of accuracy the timing of the birth of a new trend.

They are all vital to deciphering a new trend. All these factors are important reasons for new trends.

Baby and bath water. We’re looking for what factors can be considered. HH and HL (or 3 consec up bars LOL) could well be a useful clue or starting point.

Yeah, so are to tight MA's crossing! Thought we were trying to decipher better, earlier signs than the average newbies holy grail system.

You’ve not really contributed positively in my view, just thrown in a load of ‘market factors’ which although important to genral trading, serve only to muddy the waters at the level of specificity barjon is seeking to develop.

Who said I ever did. I would disagree though. If you are looking for entry at top bottom, they are all vital factors to consider.

Taking the pee with the avatar. Reckon the mods will let you stay?

Nope! Face, bothered, face, bothered etc....

 

[timsk]

Hi Tom,

What I don't understand about all this talk of LHs and LLs is that a LH is not in place until the LL is taken out, right? And if so, you sell the low and are open to the mother of all squeezes plus your stop needs to be above the LH to be safe (which is a huge stop).

What you describe is (my understanding of) basic Dow theory and, yes, you're correct which is why I said in an earlier post that even novices would think twice at entering upon the breach of the neckline - i.e. the previous LL. I also concur with your comment about stops too whch is why I've been carping on about getting in much sooner on a reversal. Pinbars - which you have single handedly made famous here on T2W - would be one option for entry, inside bars would be another. Both offer much lower risk and the potential to enter near the start of the move or at a pullback - as in the example provided by RagsToRiches earlier in the thread.

It's easy to say LH, LL in hindsight but as Bramble said, not so easy when the space to the right is blank...

Again, agreed. However, you don't have to worry about these if you enter on a reversal. Indeed, you can't worry about them as you're in the trade long before they've been created; they are but a twinkle in the market's eye!
Tim.

 

[superfly]

"3 consecutive up bars or 3 consecutive down bars.
I am suggesting though, that the start of any trend does begin with this formation."

thanks Mister Bramble

as long is this formation isnt broken at best we have a continuing move
an other option is sideways

Continued succes

 

[superfly]

"3 consecutive up bars or 3 consecutive down bars.
I am suggesting though, that the start of any trend does begin with this formation."

thanks Mister Bramble

as long is this formation isnt broken at best we have a continuing move
an other option is sideways
the beauty of this defenition is that extreem averse moves (beyond the formation)
kill the birth

Continued succes

 

[TheBramble]

Not sure what you're saying.

Jon was asking for signs that would constitute the birth of a trend. I suggested this as being one.

I wasn't suggesting you should bet the ranch on this formation. It occurs all over the place, obviously, and not just at the start of trends.

 

[superfly]

Not sure what you're saying.

Im saying as long as the vertical pricemove of this formation isnt erased
you can define it as a trend birth. This even allows for and limits what can be seen as
(allowable) sideways action at the birth of a trend.

If the 3 bars are broken the trend cycle is over.

awaiting a new birth...............

 

[blancspa]

snuff

snuff? what`s that?

 

[barjon]

mmm, well I said what would light my first light in the birthing room - http://www.trade2win.com/boards/technical-analysis/63364-birth-3.html#post784824 - and now move on the next light coming on (assuming there was a single event lighting the first one). This one comes on from the good old 1-2-3 (see chart), still early days for our young trend, but just started primary school maybe.

Unless an earlier swing high in the (previous) downtrend had been breached - in which case another light leaps into life, but that comes later in the story - I'd usually be short after the 2 in anticipation of downtrend continuation, but the failure at 3 to make a new low should have me running for the exit.

good trading

jon

 

[TheBramble]

Isn't a 1-2-3 simply a higher low and a higher high?

 

[barjon]

could look at it like that - certainly a higher low and that's the crucial one.

good trading

jon

 

[brutusdog]

mmm, well I said what would light my first light in the birthing room - http://www.trade2win.com/boards/technical-analysis/63364-birth-3.html#post784824 - and now move on the next light coming on (assuming there was a single event lighting the first one). This one comes on from the good old 1-2-3 (see chart), still early days for our young trend, but just started primary school maybe.

Unless an earlier swing high in the (previous) downtrend had been breached - in which case another light leaps into life, but that comes later in the story - I'd usually be short after the 2 in anticipation of downtrend continuation, but the failure at 3 to make a new low should have me running for the exit.

good trading

jon

The trend is 'born' at point 1 on your chart.

 

[timsk]

The trend is 'born' at point 1 on your chart.

Yes, I agree completely and this is the place to try and get in with the minimal amount of risk. There are loads of naked lows providing evidence of buying pressure, coupled with a huge increase in volume. This should alert the savvy trader that change could be around the corner. Easy to say in hindsight, I know! One can't see what's going on to the left of the chart but, perhaps the lows at 1 are coupled with previous S or R, then a good low risk entry could be formulated. Entry at 3 presents higher risk as price could easily test the lows at 1. If S is breached here, then price could waterfall. Essentially, Jon's 1-2-3 pattern is the right hand shoulder of a reverse head and shoulders pattern, where the ultimate goal must surely be to enter as near to the head as possible?
Tim.