wot happened next? No: 4

[barjon]

Thanks to everyone who had a go. I hope contributors (especially Charlton who tabbed the down move and the bounce level) will excuse me for concentrating on another master class from mr.marcus.

Nope, there’s no spy-bots or trojans been in my computer, I’ve been scrupulous in not giving any hints as to what the instrument was , nor have I done anymore than pass the time of day with mr.marcus - so he must be a wizard then .

I’m quite sure that the greater the experience of the readers of this thread then the greater will be their admiration of Mark’s peer into the future - getting on for four months worth, I must remind you, with still more yet to unfold. Once again, I hope everyone appreciates the pure gold in Mark’s analysis. If all that’s not a tour de force then I don’t know what is.

I think it’s worth going through Mark’s narration against what did unfold. The price hung about for two days (maybe a little less than Mark anticipated) before falling to Mark’s blue line support where it held for six days - onward to Mark’s key number support (yes £18) where it bounced a bit higher than anticipated - then the dump down leg with only very brief support at Mark’s first red line level until it screamed to a halt virtually smack on Mark’s second red line support - the bounce here was stronger than Mark anticipated but, albeit in a more complicated fashion, the price went on to make Mark’s anticipated double bottom. Amazing .

So I’m left with little to say. I did this one because of the gap (first white circle) and musing whether this could be a breakaway gap, particularly when it was tested by the cut off point doji bar (itself created by an up gap - second white circle) and a prelude to a significant down move within the longer term range. With the failure to break the first gap a short entered just below the low of the doji bar seems reasonable with a stop just above the same doji bar high and an initial target at the light blue line.

As Split so rightly says, I hope these wot happened examples do point up situations where a low risk trade can be placed with the opportunity to run away quickly if things don’t pan out.

good trading

jon

 

[SOCRATES]

Barjon...not quite...I will restrict the following explanation to only mechanical descriptions, expressed through gapping sequences exclusively:~

Let's see....

The first gap.that is the gap between 18.9 and 19,2 is a spoof gap.

This is because the price is suddenly marked up to 19.4 (with a tail on top) and immediately collapses.

There is no intention to take the prices higher.

The second gap, ( which is the one you have marked with the larger white circle ) is a harmonic gap.

It is harmonic with the first gap thus creating an island.

All the bars in the island have toptails. This indicates reluctance to mark up. (Pluto).

Then...thereafter the price goes sideways, with lots of bottom talis, so the gap that caused this is not a breakaway gap downwards at all, because of the reluctance of the price to motor downwards.

Then the third gap, ( smaller white circle) is a stunt. It is a ploy to trap the unwary into higher prices, hence the doji as you call it. This mark up cannot be sustained, leading to the decline that follows.

The next gap in the decline which occurs much later and occurs between 17.5 and 17.4 is a breakaway....but a breakaway followed by a controlled fall. This controlled fall culminates in a tweezer bottom (or very nearly a tweezer bottom ) at near the 16.6 level. (Uranus).

Now the mischief really starts.

Prices are laboriously marked up to around 17.7..and then gapped up...is this breakaway ? NO !

The price level of 18 is flirted with and then the price collapses through another harmonic gap and back to the 17 level or thereabouts...

And now it is made to flutter up and down and sideways, but futurologically speaking, from now on, the portents for even lower prices are in play, hence p r o d (anagram) ...solution...DROP.

Kind Regards as Usual.

 

[barjon]

thanks for putting me right, soc

on a closer look that first gap you mention is actually wider coming from the close of 1859 to the next open at 1941. the previous bar,too, was a hidden gap - the smaller blue up candle closed at 1860 and the next opened at 1894 and then collapsed back to 1860.

good trading

jon

 

[pogle]

Putting my mouse over mr.marcus's "reputation-o-meter" tells me that "mr.marcus has forgotten more than you know". This is incorrect. The truth is that mr.marcus has forgotten more than I'll *ever* know.

Once again a staggering analysis.

Many thanks mr.m

pogle

 

[SOCRATES]

thanks for putting me right, soc

on a closer look that first gap you mention is actually wider coming from the close of 1859 to the next open at 1941. the previous bar,too, was a hidden gap - the smaller blue up candle closed at 1860 and the next opened at 1894 and then collapsed back to 1860.

good trading

jon

Yes, thank you, point taken Barjon.

I have just seen your response and it merits a reply.

However you have to realise it is not possible to accurately pinpoint fractionally all the levels on this chart as there is no vertical price scale on it.

But what does scream at you is not just the gaps but how the time is being used.

But that aspect of trading and reading charts is not mechanical.

For that reason I did not include it.

I restricted my commentary to what is purely mechanical, in order to highlight mechanical gap management and mechanical gap management only, and nothing else.

Kind Regards As Usual.

 

[Splitlink]

...well that is interesting....this is gonna sound like me throwing my maracas off the stage....but nah im too unconcerned beyond this post ...apart from the team i teach....i had 1 mail...1 online thanks....and 2 kudos...now i dont need any of this to survive but i did to carry on spending all my sunday night to construct the post and the lessons which were to follow...now why is this interesting to me....feedback of any description gives you something to work with....energy,knowing that people are reading it,and a sense of teaching direction...so either...

1.the post was too long and people didn't get beyond 20 lines.groovy

2.everyone already totally understood all the points made in which case lets take it in turns writing the analyses.groovy

3.no one found any value in it as the points are wrong.groovy

4.it is not the type of analyses people want to deal with.groovy

5.value was found and a one line feedback is not a far exchange for the work and knowledge given.uncool

.....i have no idea....and am semi stunned at the apparent lack of interest...its another lesson to learn...but if this was trade i would be averaging down here.....if people dont find any value in it...this is not obviously aimed at you....but to those who found value then feedback would have been appreciated so i could have known it was worthwhile posting move and what direction to take.....anyways cheers to the few who gave some feedback and continued success... mark j

Hi mr.marcus,

You have a good reputation on this site. Sorry not to have shown my appreciation but, to be honest, I found the post too long. That is not your fault- but mine.

Regards Split

 

[neil]

Excercise for little grey cells

...ive gotta laugh split....at least your honest....it took me 15k hours to work out the precise relationships between volume and price....took 5 hrs to write up for you guys....next time ill do an audio version and send out a bottle of lucozade for everyone.... ...lost count of the times you said you dont get volume split....well the gift horses mouth is stuck open agasp.. mark j

Whats difficult for you peeps in examining MM's posts? Print off the analysis and charts then take a pencil and read through relating prose to pictures. It's all important and profitable stuff - just needs effort from the reader to follow. Then practice ( oh no - more effort).Expend a lot of effort and become one of the 5% that make it as a trader. :|

 

[timsk]

.....i have no idea....and am semi stunned at the apparent lack of interest...its another lesson to learn...but if this was trade i would be averaging down here.....if people dont find any value in it...this is not obviously aimed at you....but to those who found value then feedback would have been appreciated so i could have known it was worthwhile posting move and what direction to take.....anyways cheers to the few who gave some feedback and continued success... mark j

Hi mr.m',
I can't speak for anyone else - obviously - but having read your previous analysis, I realised that a quick 10 minute skim through this one would not do either the post, or the effort you spent writing it, justice. Therefore, I want to be able to print out the post with the charts and really study your observations point for point. I look forward to doing this soon but, as of yet, I've not actually read it. (The damn day job!) Perhaps others, like me, are taking their time to study and absorb the ideas that you have been so generous to impart. Rest assured that it is appreciated and your energies have not been wasted writing it.
Cheers,
Tim.

 

[TheBramble]

Mark - you're wasting your time. You know why you're wasting your time.

 

[SOCRATES]

I have been approached privately to say a few words.

I will explain.

Mr Marcus has gone to a lot of effort to produce this outstanding analysis, which normally is a thought process that is undergone silently when a chart, any chart is presented for examination, live, and to decide which course of action to take,if any, and what strategy is required to best maximise the potential of the moment.

But an analysis of this nature goes beyond explaining every tortuous turn in the drama of unfolding supply and demand schedules.

It lays the foundation for an understanding and appreciation of INTENT.

Intent is what actually is contained in any chart, disguised, hidden,artfully camouflaged.

It is what every proficient trader seeks to winkle out. This is because to winkle out the intent is the most crucial part of analysis at the highest level of proficiency.

By comparison, an analysis that does not illuminate intent is sterile, useless.

It causes the trader to guess, but to guess in a way that is not proficient.

That type of guesswork is like a form of gambling, because the path forward is obscured and therefore it is apt to induce action reliant on chance and luck.

There is no such thing as luck in trading in the mainstream sense of the word, nor is there always absolutely clear certainty, but there is such a thing as near certainty.

This near certainty, which is a compulsive type of enlightnenment, depends upon a complete understanding of intent.

If you aspire to master intent, before you can do that, you have to master the concepts Mr Marcus illustrates in his analysis, as it is,as I have mentioned above, the foundation upon which market mastery is firmly rooted.

 

[Splitlink]

Socrates,

I've appreciated your recent posts- you should know which ones.

Good trading Split

 

[Charlton]

The need to provide feedback

...well that is interesting....this is gonna sound like me throwing my maracas off the stage....but nah im too unconcerned beyond this post ...apart from the team i teach....i had 1 mail...1 online thanks....and 2 kudos...now i dont need any of this to survive but i did to carry on spending all my sunday night to construct the post and the lessons which were to follow...now why is this interesting to me....feedback of any description gives you something to work with....energy,knowing that people are reading it,and a sense of teaching direction...so either...

1.the post was too long and people didn't get beyond 20 lines.groovy

2.everyone already totally understood all the points made in which case lets take it in turns writing the analyses.groovy

3.no one found any value in it as the points are wrong.groovy

4.it is not the type of analyses people want to deal with.groovy

5.value was found and a one line feedback is not a far exchange for the work and knowledge given.uncool

.....i have no idea....and am semi stunned at the apparent lack of interest...its another lesson to learn...but if this was trade i would be averaging down here.....if people dont find any value in it...this is not obviously aimed at you....but to those who found value then feedback would have been appreciated so i could have known it was worthwhile posting move and what direction to take.....anyways cheers to the few who gave some feedback and continued success... mark j

Mark

I certainly appreciate your time. I know just how long an analysis can take especially when you have to write it up for others. I have not given a response as yet, because I am not in the country at the moment and have limited access to the internet, thus I have the intention of printing off your charts upon my return.

It is very important for the success of this thread and the site in total that people contribute and provide feedback. Mark is trying to teach us how to look at charts, to analyse them and to use Socrates phrase determine intent.

This learning must be interactive, therefore every reader should attempt to do it him or herself and to ask questions, otherwise the reader might as well pay for a service where this is done for them.

Charlton (from France)

 

[dazshaw]

I would like to make the point from a personal note that Mr Marcus has been one of the most generous posters on this site. He has done nothing but give, give and give. Personally I have made great steps in so far as understanding what is actually going on. Believe me when you come from knowing nothing to learning just a little, that feels like a great achievement. He has helped me focus on whats important and set me off on a journey of learning. I can do this at my own pace fast or slow, it depends on the effort that im willing to put in . But I will say this, without knowing Mark this would not have been possible. I would be still trying to guess which way the market would go. Slowly losing the account as the majority do. Mark is a rarity, so please take FULL advantage of the help and information that he is giving, because you will not find it anywhere else!

To Mark - Hope you and the team are doing well, keep the curries flowing, and be assured that some of us really appreciate the work you are doing!!!!!!

 

[temptrader]

by Socrates:
By comparison, an analysis that does not illuminate intent is sterile, useless.

It causes the trader to guess, but to guess in a way that is not proficient.

That type of guesswork is like a form of gambling, because the path forward is obscured and therefore it is apt to induce action reliant on chance and luck.

There is no such thing as luck in trading in the mainstream sense of the word, nor is there always absolutely clear certainty, but there is such a thing as near certainty.

This near certainty, which is a compulsive type of enlightnenment, depends upon a complete understanding of intent.

truer words have never been spoken.

I'll take this opportunity to compare this to horse racing.

First a diversion: My friend tried to get his money back from betfair. He was £5000 down overall with them. He did it by backing and laying horse races. Last year he was only £3000 down on betfair and managed to make £5000 over a period of 2 months with what is, ahem, a mechanical method. Yes, he did analyse the horses in the race, yes he did look into other factors like the track conditions etc. . . Anyway when he was £2000 up on betfair disaster struck. He lost it all and more and got down to £5000 to betfair over a period of a week. Could you imagine one week of losses wiping out 2 months work. So what was the problem? The method he has doing was totally probabalistic - as all mechanical methods are. I contributed to the random coin tosses thread stating that computers can't generate random numbers. What I should of added in that thread was that no one - no matter how clever or talented - can trade a random sequence, it just can't be done, you will be at no disadvantage if you were completely talentless or had years of experience, random sequence don't discriminate!!!

There was stil another way of him getting his £5000 from betfair and that was to do as the professionals do, analyse each and every race in explicit, excruciating detail (this is not a mechanical method). He did this years ago and only broke even, he stopped it simply because of one thing: it was incredibly intense work.

Which brings me to my point: horse racing has the probablistic element to it. Yes there is intent in a race. What intent is it? Trainers out for wages, they make a horse run poorly in a competitive race so that the horse can be done graded to a easier race that it will win easily. The latter "scheme" is just the tip of the iceberg. The probabilistic element is, of course, the horse itself. Everyone knows that the horse is sent out to win, but there's a chance that it won't win. Intent has to go through a probabilistic stage (horse shoe falling off, horse had a bad day feels ill, accidental fall at the fence etc . . ) which is why, and this is an important point here, you can get the best professional horse racing gambler and he'll only break even for the year because of this element. It also brings in the effect commonly know as "drawdowns", which is part and parcel of probabilistic methods.

I find it seriously interesting that you can probably count on one hand how many successful horse racing gamblers there are (the one's who backs or lays horses) and yet there are hundreds of successful traders. Probably 99.999% of the people making money on betfair are the ones who are trading the prices, not doing what my friend did.

So this brings me to the point that in trading intent doesn't have an extra probabilistic handicap (no pun intended) that it does when you are backing or laying horses. It's still hard, but it is easier that horse racing because of extra handicap.

Socrates, I once asked you about the probabilistic element to trading. You did not answer my question, but you have done so here so I offer you my thanks. My suspicions were aroused when Skim talked about backtesting being useless and that she did not use stops nor money management, all of which is potentially dangerous to the novice like me, and to my mind there was only one way you can get away with doing that . . . .

 

[neil]

The above reminds me of a book I read years ago about a gambler called "BIRD?" who would stand by the finishing line and bet on the outcome of photofinishes. That was his edge. He made a lot of money. He was the exception because many people lose at the bookies. Bookies (Birds dad was one) seem to prosper :cheesy:

 

[barjon]

The above reminds me of a book I read years ago about a gambler called "BIRD?" who would stand by the finishing line and bet on the outcome of photofinishes. That was his edge. He made a lot of money. He was the exception because many people lose at the bookies. Bookies (Birds dad was one) seem to prosper :cheesy:

Alec Bird knew my father and said hello to me as he got out of the barber's chair as I was getting in. The barber said "do you know Alec Bird - got any tips?" Well, I had the odd bet at the time and mentioned a horse. It won and the barber couldn't wait to get me in the chair the next time - another horse, another winner. I couldn't get a bet on the third horse I suggested because the whole of Berwick Street market was on it - it lost and I never dared to get my hair cut again.

Although, what all that's got to do with wot happened next I don't know :cheesy:

jon

 

[smbtnt]

Mr.Marcus,

Your posts have truly been inspirational, appreciate the effort you have gone to, I am still scrutinising the relationship between P&V bar by bar on all your posts.
I predominantly trade the Forex markets where volume data is non existent, what would you replace volume with in the Spot FX market?

 

[timsk]

The above reminds me of a book I read years ago about a gambler called "BIRD?" who would stand by the finishing line and bet on the outcome of photofinishes. That was his edge. He made a lot of money. He was the exception because many people lose at the bookies. Bookies (Birds dad was one) seem to prosper :cheesy:

neil,
I heard this story many years ago too. His 'edge' as I recall, was that he observed that the horse that won photo finishes was, in every case, the inside horse nearest to the camera. It was a glitch in the system that no one else spotted. Once the racing authorities cottoned on to this, Bird's edge was gone, but he had managed to make a fortune by that time. I've no idea if the story is true or not.

"I couldn't get a bet on the third horse I suggested because the whole of Berwick Street market was on it - it lost and I never dared to get my hair cut again."
Jon - I have this image of you with hair down to your ankles!
:cheesy:
Tim.

 

[charliechan]

truer words have never been spoken.


I find it seriously interesting that you can probably count on one hand how many successful horse racing gamblers there are (the one's who backs or lays horses) and yet there are hundreds of successful traders. Probably 99.999% of the people making money on betfair are the ones who are trading the prices, not doing what my friend did.

.

maybe, and maybe not.

professional turf speculators wait and wait and wait - until there is a horse with a favourable outlay. (his calculated odds are better than the bookies odds). a professional speculator (turf speclator or market speculator) does not put money on every race/tradable event. he must be certain the probability is in his favour.

this is why so many lose at the track and in the market: greed and impatience, and a lack of awareness of ever changing cycles. switching strategy is another reason.

 

[SOCRATES]

Yes, perhaps....

But as a substitute for the real work, the trinity, which the great majority are either unwilling or unable to do, or even both, as you know very well, so there is no point in pursuing it any further.