# Handbags at 20 paces



## tech/a (15 June 2007)

> Can I also ask, what are the bullish attributes to the time cycles you talk about. Can you paste a chart to identify these for me?




*Yes please.*

Moggie.
Do you actually chart? (serious question,and non confrontational).
I dont think Ive ever seen any of your work.
Would be good to see a thousand words in your chart picture.


----------



## Magdoran (15 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> *Yes please.*
> 
> Moggie.
> Do you actually chart? (serious question,and non confrontational).
> ...



Do I “actually chart”? Mwahaahahahahha!!!  No, I get a dart board and a monkey, blind fold the monkey, give it a banana, and buy or sell whatever comes up randomly, just like STC!  Give me a break.  Try actually reading my posts for a change.

Remember the “Improving chart analysis” thread hosted by the esteemed barney (the “trading muso” no less).  I thought I gave away far too much on that thread as it was, including posting charts, or have you forgotten?  

We had quite a debate there if you think back.  You even started to think that maybe time was important, didn’t you?

Now, I’ve posted lots of charts all over the place, just go through the commodities area for a start, or select the option to access all the posts I’ve made, you’ll find all sorts of charts there.

What you won’t find is a chart with my full IP included in it.  I deliberately choose the “hide” function sometimes while posting a chart, hence they can look a bit threadbare at times… 

Daffy you have hounded me for a long time about this, and I keep saying the same thing:  it’s all in McLaren’s DVDs.  It’s that simple.  It’s all there, and it’s the very best I’ve seen.

As for my refinements, they’re not for public consumption.  I have never intended to offer courses on it.  Yup I have done seminars on options, but not technical analysis. I know you saw SpinDr’s seminar in action over a decade ago, and he has really refined his style since then.  He’s into the stratosphere on time cycles now, you  wouldn’t recognise what he is doing currently from what he was doing then.  If you really wanted to learn, you should have learnt from him…


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



> I know you saw SpinDr’s seminar in action over a decade ago, and he has really refined his style since then. He’s into the stratosphere on time cycles now, you wouldn’t recognise what he is doing currently from what he was doing then. If you really wanted to learn, you should have learnt from him…




Moggie you get all tied in a knot.
Only interested in your chart.
Ive only ever seen an Aget chart but no charting.

Spin---nice guy met him first as the lecturer for the Securities Institute 101 course when I did it.His seminar??
Visited him at home to "Watch the action as he traded".
As I said Nice guy and I'm glad he has improved---into the stratosphere.

I'm not looking to learn anything.
If something is presented and I learn from it fine.
But I'm not actively searching out the "Holy Grail".

My PERSONAL opinion is that most "Exponents" of the ancient art of "Gann" surround themselves in mystery as they have absolutely no idea how to *APPLY* the methodology profitably,with any consistency.

Now you may not be one of the "most".
Would be nice at least I/We would have someone here that could show in an easy to follow charting progression that Gann both time and price can be applied profitably and consistently.In a logical experienced fashion.

*Moggie.*
Anyone can chart Gann with some experience,we can apply to a chart X number of "Pressure" points.
But Ive NEVER seen in realtime ANY gannist show APPLICATION of the "ART" of gann in a consistently profitable way.
Sure lots of "targets" and "areas" but No --Enter here stop here and exit here.
Just confusion as the HOW to apply GANN,not how to PLOT IT.

*Vast difference!*

Picture speaks a thousand words.(To me anyway)

Anyway EVERY time I bring this up the "Gann Clan " get all hot and steamy,and sadly nothing changes.


----------



## Edwood (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Moggie you get all tied in a knot.
> Only interested in your chart...
> 
> ...Would be nice at least I/We would have someone here that could show in an easy to follow charting progression that Gann both time and price can be applied profitably and consistently.In a logical experienced fashion.




Hi Magdoran - this is what I thought you might show the other day when I asked you on the Global Indices thread how you traded the chart that you put up.  Not looking to 'steal ideas' (LOL!) its just interesting to see what others do and as Tech says pictures are often easier than words.

So how about it then??  thats two of us keen to watch the Gann master at work - anyone else interested?

Cheers,

Edwood


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



Edwood said:


> Hi Magdoran - this is what I thought you might show the other day when I asked you on the Global Indices thread how you traded the chart that you put up.  Not looking to 'steal ideas' (LOL!) its just interesting to see what others do and as Tech says pictures are often easier than words.
> 
> So how about it then??  thats two of us keen to watch the Gann master at work - anyone else interested?
> 
> ...



Hello Ed,


I thought I answered that question to some extent on the “International Index Trading” thread, didn’t I?


*The DAX trading example:*

The example of the DAX was assuming a long term bullish position was in play, and using a diagonal ratio back spread leg as a counter trend play (and hedge while maintaining an unlimited reward to the upside) based on a technical estimation of resistance in time and price on the 02 June, and looking to wind that out by buying back the sold calls on 08 June where support in time and price was identified: (see 







Magdoran said:


> click here for the link to post 353




The charts posted just showed the bars and where I thought support/resistance was most probable. The 02 June time point was originally identified as a key time increment in the “Trading The SPI - Gann Techniques” thread in post 33. 

The idea was essentially to sell the 02 June resistance (there was a price extension in play here too, but it was primarily the time and the pattern that was important), and wind out the bearish trade of the swing down into 08 June (also a price increment was in the workings but was less relevant than the time).  You could use any number of approaches here, including just selling the index and then closing it.

The actual working charts I use are very, very busy, and would not make any sense to the average trader.  Try the Zinc and Gold threads, and you’ll see more workings in those charts (but not the core IP, I never publish that).

I think some people don’t understand that it is impossible to give a simple answer to a complex question.  It’s like a complete novice coming up to an expert physicist/neurosurgeon/constitutional lawyer and expecting to be shown instantly all the relevant components required.  Similarly, I can’t just wave a magic wand and voila!  Hey presto, put up a chart and for it all to make sense.


*Access the Ideas:*

Unfortunately Ed, I can’t post up any of the hours and hours of DVD visual material that is copyright by Mclaren. If you want the embryonic trading approach to both analysis and trade planning, it’s all there on his DVDs, including suggestions on a range of approaches of where/when to enter, where/when to take profits, where/when to place stops, in detail.  But it’s a whole style that is very different to orthodox schools, and very configurable for individual preferences.  I have no intention of stealing his thunder or IP.

Try going through my various posts – especially the ones on technical analysis like the ones in the “Improving Chart Analysis” thread if you want to pick up on some of the technical concepts, or focus on the posts on systems, trading styles, profit taking, and even derivatives if you like (I believe the body of my work while not cohesive as a whole, is still quite thorough and full of detailed information for a free source).  I have spent countless hours drafting all this material, so why not take the time to access it via the “find all posts” function and browse at your leisure.  

What people have to understand with this “style” is that there are several basic concepts that are mandatory building blocks in my view that you must master in order to be able to access the more developed concepts.  It’s like trying to either read or write a book without knowing the alphabet, and rules of grammar. These building blocks have to be learned first.  An illiterate person for instance is not going to be able to access the knowledge contained in a book if they can’t read.  It is the same for this style of charting.   

If anyone wants to know more, it’s really quite simple:  Just go to my name on the post, left click and select “Find all posts” and browse away.  Those who have contacted me by PM have been given pointers once they’ve done the basics.  I’m quite happy to give pointers to those who’ve done their “homework”…


*Gann Master?*

I’m not sure about the title of being a “Gann master” - from my perspective I am just a fellow trader /investor, and technically first and foremost a chartist of sorts, and later I moved to Elliott Wave, then incorporated McLaren’s observations on pure charting and technical analysis methods, then built on all of this over the years, so I have my own unique hybrid perspective. My work is still very embryonic in my view, and will probably take me years to fully develop and refine, so the “master” title seems unwarranted to me. 

But the name “Gann” conjures up all sorts of different connotations for different people depending on your own experience of it.  It is so vast and multifaceted that the term I think is pretty meaningless to me without some kind of qualification.  Even Elliott Wave is becoming like this with so many different schools of thinking on the subject, but the core work though is much more cohesive and methodical, as are the many revisions such as Prechter and Frosts work, Neely, Fischer, Miner, Poser, etc.

The Gann element I have incorporated is mainly drawn from the time cycle area, but a lot is drawn from McLaren’s interpretations (sure, looked at a range of others such as Bryce T Gilmour, Jenkins, Cohen, Pesavento, Bowden, off the top of my head).  Sure, I am constantly researching and seeking new ideas and methods, and sure, I’ve read a lot of Gann’s original works that I’ve been able to locate over the years.  But I’m certain that there are whole rafts of knowledge that I have either missed or not fully understood.  Yogi for instance draws from the same body of knowledge, but has his own unique and radically different approach to mine for example.


I hope that at least provides some avenues for you to consider.



Kind Regards


Magdoran


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Moggie you get all tied in a knot.
> Only interested in your chart.
> Ive only ever seen an Aget chart but no charting.
> 
> ...



Daffy, 


I suspect that you may not have read my posts relevant to your question.  Your claim that I have not demonstrated how to apply the various parts of the methodology is wrong.  In fact I have outlined the approach many times, but some of the “pieces of the puzzle” are available in different threads since the whole is quite involved.

You seem to say that you haven’t seen my charts that are non Advanced GET based.  Have forgotten the “Gannalyst” charts that you requested on the “Improving Chart Analysis” thread?  Have you forgotten a whole raft of charts that you commented on in other threads too?  You even saw a version many years ago on RC which you attacked back then too.  Are you losing your memory, or are you being deliberately obtuse?

If you take the time to follow my posts, I’ve articulated the logic behind the analysis, even covering position size, partial exits, how to use complex derivative strategies, etc.  Have you read these?  Perhaps if you conducted more research and took the time to read through my work, you’d see that most of your questions have already been addressed.  However I will briefly address some of your comments here:

The idea of dealing in probabilities and patterns in a forecasting style is derived from the core idea is that there are many possibilities about where the market may move to at any given time.  The future is not yet written, hence all any of us can do is to formulate an approach to deal with uncertainty, looking to develop an edge that yields consistent profits, agreed?

The approach is based on a probabilistic approach (in part based on Mark Douglas’ works) where one looks to position on a counter trend if following the trend (or can alternatively position to trade a counter trend) either by entering on a day or price or both identified by the analysis as being where it is probable that support (resistance) should be found.  

This is primarily based on the pattern (and may include any combination of the pattern of trend, wave structure, division of the range, and time cycles). This can be done either selling into strength/buying into weakness, or waiting for confirmation depending on the skill of the individual and their preference. 

The core objective is to use technical methods to identifying time and price points of support and resistance, time cycles, pattern of trend, etc; I identify times where I’d look to go long or short, look to take profits, where the stops could be set based on personal preference (these approaches are very dependant on style and level of acceptable risk for each individual), and what the failure criteria was.  When I was including the failure criteria in my posts, this was attacked by the ignorant peons as being an “each way bet” hence when I stopped doing this, people like you started to question the underlying logic that was no longer being included.

Partial positions: (exit half/third/two thirds) can be taken as profit based on a number of different criteria based on style – technical – at identified time and/or price points where resistance (assuming a bullish position) is expected, or even full exits, or other forms of hedging such as diagonal ratio positions if trading options and the strategy is viable (again a whole body of knowledge required here too), - percentage profit, time based, price based, exit on doubling, or a combination of these.

Stop loss rules can also be developed, again on the overall expectancy and risk model as defined by the individual.  Essentially one can exit based on a technical failure of a pattern, or set a technical time or price criteria, or set a percentage loss, or based on the time frame and risk profile preferred.  Me I tend to use the technical pattern failure as the criteria, say a price below a pivot if long the underlying, and waiting to exit often on the bullish counter trend.  I’ve been working on being able to reverse positions in such cases more consistently for example.

So in essence, where I say resistance is expected this could be a point to take profits, or look to go short (I often give a date where I expect support to occur, or a price, or both).  Where I say support is expected this could be a point to enter long, take profits if short (I often give a date where I expect resistance to occur, or a price, or both).  A lot depends on the time frame, but this is great for position/swing trading, or if in a longer term position, hedging these positions, or taking profits or adding to these positions.

It’s really not hard to work this out.  If I give a date and price in the future that is 2 weeks or a month away from the present position, surely this is sufficient information to formulate trades based on a range of different money management styles, isn’t it?  

If I identify that the underlying is in an uptrend, but has been counter trending down, and I identify a future higher price a month away, and give a probable date for support a couple of days away, how hard is it to work out when to enter and exit, especially if I can either give a current estimate of price and time, and later give the exact price around a week out from the target time point?  The key to this approach is knowing the time to get out, and the time to get in based on probability.  If the pattern fails, then the plan is followed.  If the forecast needs adjusting, then this is incorporated, and the appropriate changes made to the trading plan if required.  This isn’t rocket science, and pretty common I would have thought?

How’s that for a start?  This is all covered throughout my many posts - enjoy!


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Moggie you get all tied in a knot.
> Only interested in your chart.
> Ive only ever seen an Aget chart but no charting.
> 
> ...



*“Gann” – an evil word, or an opportunity to think differently?*

Daffy, I think it is you who have a bugbear about “Gann”.  For years you have rudely attacked me out of ignorance because you had an ugly run in with someone else years ago who happened to have used this label (I can’t think why anyone would take offence from you tech).  

It’s pure bigotry.  It’s like you had a bad experience with someone of a different race, hence whenever you see a person of that racial group, you ascribe the nature of the first person to someone entirely different, and attack them because of the colour of their skin with no understanding that about the diversity of personalities.  You still don’t get this.

The only things that are “ancient” is the long running feud that you engender, not to mention your thinking.  You’re like the proverbial bull in a china shop the second you invoke the name “Gann’.  You constantly impose this unrealistic and ignorant viewpoint on a broad body of knowledge, and ascribe a connotation of evil on all the works uncritically.  

What have you actually looked at Daffy?  Have you read any of the original works?  Have you actually gone through the McLaren DVDs yet?  No?  Then how on earth can you be objective and draw the unfounded conclusions you keep peddling?  Pure ignorance is not a good foundation for developing an understanding or developing a sound critique. 

It’s like your concept of the “Gannists” – an evil sect of charlatans bent on duping poor unsuspecting traders of their hard earned cash.  Sure there are charlatans out there, but the whole market is full of them.  There are opportunists that charge exorbitant rates to learn all aspects related to financial markets, real estate, not to mention get rich quick schemes like the WestPoint scam (and the architect is still a millionaire from this stolen money!!! – why he hasn’t been successfully prosecuted beats me – he belongs in Gaol for life in my view).

But to tar all people who use one method or another with the same brush is evidence of your unsound thinking, and your preference to revert to petty emotional games.  When you start to act your age, people might begin to respect you for more than your knowledge alone.

Then you demand things from other people, hounding some, and abusing others.  You’re not even pleasant or polite about it.  It kind of reminds me of a child saying “I WANT, I WANT, I WANT” and if you don’t get your way, you spit the dummy.  Well tantrum away Duckie, because this “Moggie” ain’t going to be cajoled, goaded or moved by your incessant bluster.  

So, “Super Brat”, you can waddle back to that retaining wall concentration camp of yours and torture some more victims there, but the rest of us don’t have to put up with your “McEnroe” impressions.


*****​
Re Spin, I meant when you attended a seminar given by him, not the whole thing – maybe you could call it a lecture, or a class – whatever… but you saw something presented to him way back, right?


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

Moggie.

I havent read all of your posts as I'm certain you havent read all of mine.

What you have outlined is certainly a basic methodology that any of us can come up with using the tools you mention.

I have found a chart on the Zinc thread all marked out nicely by gann analysts and I will use it as an example as to why I think that from what I have seen profitable application it would appear (admittedly in THIS case) to be nigh impossible.

Hence my question.
I'll go get it and summarize it in a mo.


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

*Whoa*!!!

What happened in 7 minutes?
From Jekkel to Hyde!!
Keep your hat on back in a mo.


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Moggie.
> 
> I havent read all of your posts as I'm certain you havent read all of mine.
> 
> ...



Well ducky,


You’d be surprised what I’ve read of yours.  Quite a lot more than you’d suspect…

But then I make an effort to research things, don’t I?

As for your view on my analysis, I really couldn’t give a $%^&.

You don’t even understand EW with much depth, so how can you get your beak around time cycles I wonder?


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> *Whoa*!!!
> 
> What happened in 7 minutes?
> From Jekkel to Hyde!!
> Keep your hat on back in a mo.



Oh, I thought it was over quite a few years actually, short memory…  I have a slightly longer memory!


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Moggie.
> 
> I havent read all of your posts as I'm certain you havent read all of mine.
> 
> ...



As I said, I hit the “hide” button for some of the workings on my charts since I don’t want to reveal my IP…

But I do identify key time points, and others have understood what I’m on about.  It’s not hard.

The charts to look at were in the “Improved Chart Analysis” thread actually…

But go ahead and attack away Daffy, that’s what you love.  

Tear down anything you don’t understand, abuse those who won’t yield to your ego.

I’ve see it once with you, I’ve seen it a thousand times!  After all, it’s in your nature.


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> What you have outlined is certainly a basic methodology that any of us can come up with using the tools you mention.



You think?  Didn’t I just say that? – it’s not rocket science… Positive expectancy models and entry exit rules based systems are pretty common.  So how hard is it to draw the dots from the analysis?


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

*Moggie.*

Ill take this chart of Zinc.
Now when it comes to applying the analysis this is an example of where I believe things fall apart.
Here Gann Analyst gives a number of time and price (by way of Channels and grids) pressure points.
Which as a trader one would either trade toward or react to price action at those or toward those points.
So 3rd of May youd be long expecting to trade into 21 May if the higher low was to hold.----so far it has.

Points are 15th MAY
              21 MAY
              2nd JUNE
              8th JUNE

There are more but lets look at those that have passed.
15th May your long so would not have been expecting the fall in price to start the 9th. You would have expected bullish into 21st














.

21st May still well below entry and still above the Higher low---Where are you in the trade?

2nd June and 8th June in no mans land.
How can you *apply* this? So far your "Presumed stop" the higher low is STILL in tact and all bullish sell points have passed with not much more than a whimper.

I cant see practical application in THIS chart.

Cant see any positive expectancy models other than a "Possible" expectancy if the trade goes to plan---which it hasnt---not at all.
A positive expectancy is calculated from many trades over a long period not of ONE possibility ( this is ofcourse how most traders explain and apply positive expectancy!!!!).

Do you have another?


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

Perhaps we could discuss your analysis on the XAO which is the topic.

I cant see the point in analysis OF ANY KIND if you cant apply it at least with some possibility of success.


----------



## >Apocalypto< (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Perhaps we could discuss your analysis on the XAO which is the topic.
> 
> I cant see the point in analysis OF ANY KIND if you cant apply it at least with some possibility of success.




Tech,

Not every one can be right all the time, no system can be right all the time, not even Tech trader!

I think what Mag shares with us is truly great and i see much substance in his work and i for one don't think just anyone can do what he does.

you care to make any future price calls that come one point with in it?


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

Trade it.

Its *NOT* about being right.

Its about *Practical Application*.

I dont care what method we are talking about.
Fundamental,Gann,Elliott,Dart throwing,Off the shelf technical analysis.

It doesnt matter.

You can analyse your brains out but unless you can apply that analysis in a meaninful CONSISTENT methodology whats the point? ---and with Gann your told that it takes Years to become an exponent!

Why would you take years learning something---when you cant apply it to your trading?
The above is an example of where I cannot see the application of the analysis helping in any way to make a profitable trade.

Now I'm hoping Moggie will be able to explain and further educate those like myself who cant see how spending years learning the ancient art of GANN is of any benifit.

With Elliott I see its application as plain as day.
Same with pretty well anything else presented.

Why is it that exponents of other forms of analysis have no trouble getting their applications across but it seems ALL gannists cant!

My guess is they just DONT KNOW how.


----------



## steven1234 (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

Theres only one way to settle this, post your time and price estimates and a brief explanation behind your methodology.....  We can revist in a few weeks and determine who was closer.


----------



## >Apocalypto< (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Trade it.
> 
> Its *NOT* about being right.
> 
> ...




Tech,

I see your point I am using Gann principles in my trading now, not to the same extent as Mag, but the basics i use are helping a lot.

I myself could never study for years then apply that's not me but I do agree with learning a long the way and doing your best. Which from what I have read in your posts and can say about your development you have done that as well.

I am truly amazed at what Mag, does and his knowledge of harmony and time projection. he has raw talent at it. I am a fan of Gann but i am far from the astrological stuff, I prefer to keep it simple. I dont know how easy it would be for Mag to explain it as with Gann from my little knowledge it starts to just click and you can see things, but that's all i can say on that. *Mag your thoughts??*

I also believe in what you have done with Tech Trader and how you have addaped to the current market situation and done so well in your system development.

You and Mag are like chalk and cheese very differnt but you are both successful that's all what counts in the market. I think people in here have a lot to learn from the both of you and there should be no contest.

No matter which way u choose to trade well known or your own methodology as long as you make a profit and are enjoying the challenge that's what matters. 

Good trading.


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



steven1234 said:


> Theres only one way to settle this, post your time and price estimates and a brief explanation behind your methodology.....  We can revist in a few weeks and determine who was closer.





Steven I'm not competing I'm asking for Moggie (as he is supposedly a master at the application of Gann) to practically demonstrate for us mear mortals how the application of gann can enhance a trade.
I'm suggesting posting of charts to help in explaination.

*Its easier to follow and discuss.*

I want to know how he handles a trade when it wins,loses and or does nothing.Practical application can only be followed as a chart and the thoughts and analysis behind that chart unfold.
Many have done it before Radge does it for his members on a daily basis.
Ive done it,Kauri has done it,Ducati has/is doing it many others who Ive missed.

Whats the big deal,Moggies an advocate of Gann show and discuss---whats the problem?---why the attack?

I'm extremely hopeful we can have a meaningful discussion on GANN application.
I dont think it can be applied to a profitable methodology.
See ZINC chart and WHY.
Lets do another few.

Ive used the example in his ZINC chart and await a reply.


----------



## Magdoran (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

What people need to realise is that I didn’t just wake up one day and say, “right, I’m going to ditch moving averages and become an Elliott Wave trader”, and later on suddenly decide “wow, I think I’ll use time cycles instead of Elliott Wave”.  It was a slow and methodical process, and evolved over time with much trial and error.

I’m pretty sceptical, and I don’t change my thinking lightly.  I am inquisitive, and I do investigate, but I’m careful and slow to change until I’m sure about something, and satisfied I have realistically researched it enough to make a rigorous appraisal. 

I used to day trade Warrants many years ago, and had some great wins early on, using a moving average oscillator approach.  What happened though is that over time I had some spectacular losses which more than negated my wins, when many of my long positions suddenly pulled back hard, and I exited on stop for a significant loss.

I also found that when stocks were trending down that I’d buy false breaks, watch the stock dive, exit, and then watch the damn thing go flying to the stars with me out of it, and with a reduced bank account.  Sound familiar?

One day I got the shock of my life when I put up around 80K on a trade, and once long, the stock was put into a trading halt on bad news.  I can still remember the sick feeling today, I’m sure my face went white, and I felt like I’d been in a car accident.  This called for a major reappraisal about everything I was doing because it wasn’t working in the long run.  

I learnt more about risk to reward, position sizing, more about leveraged instruments and how they worked, read every psychology book I could get my hand on.  But importantly I recognised the moving average system I had wasn’t working, I’d buy false breaks, overstay positions that were winners only to see them become gaping losses, get out of positions on stop and see the stock rocket to where I would have made a profit…

So, how did I get here?


I discovered pure charting, and read every book on the subject I could find.  I did candle stick charts, technical patterns, and started to move ahead slowly again.  But even this wasn’t enough.  Sure, I got really good at recognising a range of candlestick patterns and interpreting bars and volume by the traditional technical analysis methods, but still these sudden shifts would happen as if from nowhere, and I thought “there must be a better way”.  So, I discovered Elliott Wave (EW).

EW really helped since I was using derivatives that had a time component, and one of the biggest problems I suffered from was getting the direction right, and the magnitude, but got the timing wrong, hence lost because I didn’t buy enough time.

So, I got better and better at using wave structure to position from, and sort of began to understand how markets trend in waves.  In retrospect this was pretty rudimentary, but it was a marked improvement even while this was driven primarily by the moving average mechanical system.

Then I had a break though.  I found a really good trader online, I’d seen his calls, and they were consistently good.  In fact they were better than good, they were amazing.  He’d call exact dates to enter and exit.  He knew which way a stock or index was trading, and when to get in on a pull back if long, or a rally to go short, with such precision, it took my breath away.

Interestingly, this guy took a lot of flak from the naysayers who just couldn’t accept what he was doing, because they didn’t understand his methods, and were trying to promote their own style at the expense of his.  I thought, “wow, this guy is really good.  It sure beats the pants off what I’m doing.  Why don’t I have a look at that and see if I can work out how to do the same thing”.

So I began listening to his suggestions, and he gave me a few pointers.  He suggested McLaren, and ditching all the indicators and focusing on straight bar chart and volume. This was hard to do at first, but I did it.  The first day I watched that Foundation DVD, my head spun (this was only the first set by the way).

“What was I thinking for all that time trading” I thought.  “I know NOTHING.”.  That’s when I decided to halt all trading and focus on the new material to the exclusion of all else.  I ate drank and breathed that material, poured over charts, took notes, tried to apply the knowledge and paper trade it.

Then suddenly I was doing all sorts of freaky things like working out resistance and support in price sometimes to the cent consistently, so that other traders I knew were impressed and started to take notice too.  A couple of guys I knew got in on the act too, and we started to meet regularly to study the material together.  Then a lot of pennies dropped, and I started to see counter trends, and patterns that blew my mind.

Later as time went on, I got the time factor DVD, and that changed everything.  I had no idea about how important time was. It was a long time digesting all the ideas there (still don’t think I’ve worked all of these out yet either), and I started to accumulate a lot of Gann’s materials, and sought out people using Gann.

Mostly there were a lot of (in my view) flimsy so called “Gann” systems and approaches out there that in no way resembled what I was learning. I still think there is a lot of bunk out there masquerading as “Gann” that either has little to do with it, or used outdated ineffective methods, and the course charges had to be seen to be believed.

So, my little group flourished, and I really got my head around the material, but my mentor kept saying, "you haven’t got it yet".  This was incredibly frustrating for a long, long time.   But finally, I was able to make some really good trades and suddenly a huge “aha” moment happened when I was able to really see support and resistance in time and price using the time cycles.

Many have seen my work in action, and it’s up to the individual to determine if they think this approach is worthwhile.  Just think about this though, I don’t have a course to sell, so there’s no ulterior motive there.  The fact that I keep my core IP to myself should tell people something.  If I was a dog and pony show course seller, I’d be promoting my site and selling materials and courses etc.  But I don’t.  My focus is on trading the market as effectively as possible for me.  That’s it.

What I have done is to try to return the favour for the support generously given to me for those who need the help.  I really don’t have an ego stake in this, I just love the art for itself.  I am passionate about it, and love to share this passion with like minds.  So, whatever nonsense goes on at the periphery, this is my prime motivation.


Regards



Magdoran


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

*Now about that ZINC chart.*



Thought you missed it!


----------



## theasxgorilla (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

We really should do another thread for this...people are going to miss something really important on the XAO 

ASX.G


----------



## tech/a (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

happy to see Moggies XAO chart as well.

But as usual deflection from the question.
Moggie types a lot but really says very little.

Soon as you discuss and question Moggies analysis it becomes a battle.
He's more evasive than a politician.

Moggie the *ZINC CHART*

Then lets have a look at your XAO chart.


----------



## wavepicker (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

One thing I have noticed among the Gann practioners in particular Yogi, is that they come up with quite a few dates that are deemed to being significant. My question to them is, how do you know which dates might be significant and which ones are not? How does one go about trading from these dates and how do establish the magnitude of a move following a "key date"?

In my own work throughout the years I have tried very hard to narrow down the possibilities/probabilities and try and stack the cards in my favour for possible trades. Especially with regard to reducing the vast amount of EW alternate scenarios. Have tried to do this a number of ways, and presently looking at another different form of TIME analysis(not Gann related) 

With regard to the amount of possible dates in the Gann analysis, I think Glenn Neely summed it up pretty well when he looked at it. He correctly made the point that a method should look at reducing the amount of possibilities not increase them. 

By the same token I respect that that it is possible on occasion the make both price and time forecasts using this method and as Mag has demonstrated in the past. Once again how significant a forecast date may be, does not easily seem to be determined by this analysis. That is not to say that it cannot be done using this method though.

Cheers


----------



## Edwood (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



theasxgorilla said:


> We really should do another thread for this...people are going to miss something really important on the XAO
> 
> ASX.G




lol ASX.G!


----------



## Edwood (16 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

a few 'live-time' traded charts would address most of the questions that are out there Magdoran.  can't be that tough, surely.


----------



## Magdoran (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



Edwood said:


> a few 'live-time' traded charts would address most of the questions that are out there Magdoran.  can't be that tough, surely.



Hello all and Edwood,


It’s this simple:  tech/a is hell bent on extracting both wavepicker’s and my IP, and has been at us to divulge what we are doing for a long time.  No dice for the duck.  He can quack all he wants, but it’ll be a cold day in hell before he gets one modicum of our work.  

This is because tech has insulted both wavepicker and I in PMs and has been an ardent trouble maker for years (on other sites – this is not a new attack from him, just a repetition of the tired old cliché’s).  At one point I thought we’d reached an accommodation, only to find he was back to his old abusive tricks again.

I will post what I like, when I like, in my own good time.

If people are really interested please read my posts, especially the ones that direct them to both past and current forecasts and examples of my work that I have already posted. There are a host of charts and histories out there if you look for them.  This bullying by tech is not new, and he does this all the time with me, and has for years.  Sometimes you just get tired of his selective memory on this subject, and every so often he trots this nonsense out for new people who don’t know his belligerent history… 

Hence, here is a taste of what is out there.  I’ve even made it simple enough for people to just click through the post and thread links, how’s that?

The best case in point as I keep saying is on the “Improving Chart Analysis” thread, where tech was doing exactly the same nonsense, but despite his rudeness I actually put up some charts and ran through the process at a high level.  I posted up then as much IP as I’m likely to post.  See post 29 below and read on from there:







Magdoran said:


> Hello barney





*BHP example:*

See the real chart provided with the BHP commentary on the “Potential swing trades” thread where once again tech was even discussing this but conveniently forgets my work yet again with that selective memory of his:



Magdoran said:


> To me this is still bullish, and expect BHP to reach one of the price targets around 23rd Feb ($32, 30.16, 31.07, 29.54).





*XAO example:*

This is the most salient example of my work so far, and I have even gone to the trouble of setting up links for you:

First post of the projection for the XAO high in the “Zinc the metal for 2006” thread on 22 January 2007



Magdoran said:


> my best shot guess currently for the XAO is a bullish drive of some kind into a top around the 24th of Feb




Actual forecast for the XAO February high 01 February 2007 on the “Trading The SPI - Gann Techniques” 



Magdoran said:


> 24 February 2007 may be a significant date for the XAO, with 06 February 2007 as a minor increment, and 01 April 2007 as a major increment.
> 
> Essentially I’d expect a high on the 24th Feb if the time cycle I see is correct, (but if this is exceeded, may see a blow off into 01 April for a high).  So the actual high may be + or – 1 trading day from 23 Feb or 26 Feb (22 – 27), but would expect the high on either the Friday or the Monday.




Price forecast for the XAO top in the ZFX – Zinifex on 17 February 2007:



Magdoran said:


> For the XAO I have 23-24 Feb as a key time point, and suspect we may see a top of some sort come in here.  It may be a major or a minor pull back if my cycle analysis holds true (XAO index target is 6025.31, or 6078.40 – in that order) or the next critical time I see is 01 April depending on how the market plays out.




Series of comments warning people of an impending correction:

February 23 2007:


Magdoran said:


> "Ring, RING!"




Key warning 26 February 2007



Magdoran said:


> I’m not a doom and gloom merchant, and I don’t have a crystal ball either.  What I do have is the capacity to analyse the patterns of trend, and to imagine the future, and build scenarios and assign probabilities to those possible outcomes. I’m looking for an opportunity to profit substantially from the short side when this market terminates.  Knowing the patterns which precede this kind of event, and positioning correctly is the key to taking advantage of this kind of move.
> 
> That means taking action when your methods allow you to perceive a pattern that has a probability of being terminal, and determining the most appropriate strategy...
> 
> ...





On the “International Index Trading” thread you can look at the current DAX call (particularly posts 327, 350 ) - you may find this of interest to your recent DAX trade if you look at my posts chronologically with the charts (don’t forget that the actual DAX trading date is one day behind the published dates):



Magdoran said:


> The DAX has reached a key date and found resistance (Please see the commentary on the “Trading the SPI - Gann techniques” thread for more information).
> 
> Assuming the cycle I have been using is correct, this is a point where I would expect at least a halt in the bullish drive here, maybe into the June 08 increment to find support, but may pull back further.







Magdoran said:


> Last night's price action looks to me like the DAX has found some support, and would expect a brief rally from here
> 
> Now, I’ll put that more simply in English from the above paragraph – the pattern is to move sharply down (as it’s done), find support, and then trend into 20 July for a high.  Currently I’m favouring this as the most probable forecast with the current data.




I haven’t had time to link the “Trading the SPI - Gann techniques” thread but the projections there are also relevant.

You may also wish to view the US market calls (post 326 and 418), on the “International Index Trading” thread and the Gold call on the Gold thread which are currently running real time.  



Magdoran said:


> This is certainly a turbulent time in the markets, but I still think the US market is bullish despite the marked bearish price action on the Shanghai composite.
> 
> The S&P 500 and the Dow both look like they should have a brief and minor pause or pull back (suspect 1-4 trading days), and then I’d expect some kind of bullish rally.
> 
> Overall, while these cycles are evident, I remain bullish on the US market.  (Please see the commentary on the “Trading the SPI - Gann techniques” thread for more information).






Magdoran said:


> Current musings on the S&P 500




For past examples have a look back on the “Trading the SPI Gann Technique” thread and you’ll find a series of calls there, the most salient being the XAO call which was made a month out, and the supporting call for the DAX is there too.

There is also a current call on the gold thread too, but again, haven’t had time to do links for this.  Also, the Zinc example goes right back through the ZFX thread, hence may be of interest too, but this takes time to set up.  Please appreciate that I’m doing all the research that you guys could do if you went back chronologically through threads.

So Edwood, please take the time to go through your own charts in line with my posts, and really examine the work honestly, and see what you think.

Hope that helps…


Mag

P.S. Time for bed, YAWN!


----------



## tech/a (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

Wavepicker---*EXACTLY*

Moggie.
I have no interest in your IP (Whatever IP is).

The *exact point* I make about Gann analysis Wavepicker has managed to put into words and I have placed into graphic picures in the *ZINC* example.

I dont know what it is but all practitioners of Gann avoid direct questions and start attacking the person.
My and Edwood's questions I see as legitimate.The sort of question most would ask who have seen the proponderance of "Pressure points" and the sad lack of trading application of GANN by its exponents.

There is a *ZINC* chart up there with questions attached---all you do is avoid directly answering it.

This should serve as a warning to anyone considering education in GANN as this is the type of circular,avoidance you will encounter from practitioners.

Again an observation from my own experience when directly questioning GANN practitioners.

I think Moggie has summed it up IN HIS case well.
*"I just love the art for itself."*--- Its a never ending challenge to refine to a point where you CAN apply it. As you have stated your working continually on the "Time" component. Seems you fully understand my questions---you dont have an answer.

Application isnt a priority----personally Moggie I doubt you trade---well consistently anyway.Which explains the lack of practical application.

Thats fine and NOT a personal attack simply an observation.

To apply the likes of Gann and Elliott timelines I dont think you need to be spot on anyway.Infact to trade profitably you dont need time at all.
Handy yes---a prerequisite to profit NO.

*Moggie this ISNT ABOUT YOU.
Its about the APPLICATION of the ANALYSIS.*

I'll have a look at your other references.


----------



## yogi-in-oz (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



wavepicker said:


> One thing I have noticed among the Gann practioners in particular Yogi, is that they come up with quite a few dates that are deemed to being significant. My question to them is, how do you know which dates might be significant and which ones are not? How does one go about trading from these dates and how do establish the magnitude of a move following a "key date"?
> 
> 'picker, this trading stuff is not exactly rocket-science ...
> there IS only 3 scenarios ... 3 positions we can take, at ANY point in time:
> ...




have a great day

  paul



=====


----------



## Magdoran (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Wavepicker---*EXACTLY*
> 
> Moggie.
> I have no interest in your IP (Whatever IP is).
> ...



You see, this is the kind of BS you get with tech.  I get so sick of his circular arguments, where he keeps repeating the same argument over and over irrespective of whatever anyone else says.  His views are set in concrete, and nothing anyone else says will change his view.

He’s like a stuck record – he attacks your integrity, ignores the logic of your argument, twists what you say, and accuses you of being evasive when you directly address his sophistry head on.

Then he pigeon holes people, just like a racist would in Alabama during the height of the race riots.  Once Tech tars someone with a brush, they forever have those warped attributes in his mind, and then he attacks the reality and goes into denial.  This is a sick, sick mind here.  A complete psychopath in action.

He becomes obsessed with attacking the straw man creations of his, which is why no one can change tech’s mind, because he warps everything into the fantasy world he constructs in his mind.  You just can’t have a constructive dialogue with someone who is this far out of touch with reality.  I’ve tried to develop a constructive relationship with him, believe me.  It is a struggle, and it’s not the responsibility of anyone on ASF to be his wet nurse.

Just see the conversations on the Improving chart analysis thread, and many of the interactions after this, when he slipped back into his tirades.  What caused the renewal of hostilities with him sending wavepicker and I abusive PMs?  Reality is what did it. I’ll say more in detail in the next post.


----------



## Magdoran (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



tech/a said:


> Wavepicker---*EXACTLY*
> 
> Moggie.
> I have no interest in your IP (Whatever IP is).
> ...



*You be the judge:*

Here’s the facts:  For all of tech’s ability as a chartist, he was caught completely by surprise when the corrective move happened from 28 February onwards.  

Tech does not accept that I’d figured out a highly probable time and index level point for the XAO to hit a high on February 23 2007.  Just look through my published comments around this time to see what I was thinking in post 534 above, get out your own chart of the All Ordinaries index, and follow my comments and make up your own mind.  

I have presented my evidence that I was fully aware that a correction in my view was a high probability, and said so.  For those who are interested (and if you’re sick of this nonsense, then I can sympathise, I’ve endured this crap from tech for years), please evaluate the evidence and come to your own conclusion on this issue.

This recent tirade of tech’s stems I think from a combination of jealousy, and the need to tear down an alternative way of looking at the market that he doesn’t understand, by any means possible.

He feigns interest, but his real motivation is to attack and destroy, discredit and abuse.  If he really was interested in an open and constructive discussion, he’d do as others have done like Lesm for example (see his approach in the “Improving Chart Analysis” thread).



tech/a said:


> This should serve as a warning to anyone considering education in GANN as this is the type of circular,avoidance you will encounter from practitioners.




Now, how exactly is putting up all the evidence in post 534 avoidance?  How is posting up forecasts ahead of time (as tech has consistently been demanding for years) “avoidance”?  How is responding with charts and comments in the “Improving Chart Analysis”, and the “Potential swing trades” threads - “Avoidance”?

What does he want?  He calls for charts to look at the process of Analysis.  When this is done, he switches to saying “how is this applied”.  When this is clearly demonstrated by examples of entry and exit rules in post 512 on this thread he reverts to his next piece of sophistry and says:


tech/a said:


> I dont know what it is but all practitioners of Gann avoid direct questions and start attacking the person.
> My and Edwood's questions I see as legitimate.The sort of question most would ask who have seen the proponderance of "Pressure points" and the sad lack of trading application of GANN by its exponents.




Does this not seem a little biased?  He has imposed his judgment yet again without even looking at the counter arguments. 

The fact that I've posted both charts, forecasts and numerous responses to questions is not recognised, and this is labelled “avoidance”.  How would we describe tech’s behaviour?  Belligerent?  Caustic?  Psychopathic?  Bigoted?  Fanatical?  Harassing?  Abusive? I’m sure you can think of some more. 

This is why debating tech is pointless.  He just doesn’t acknowledge anything that doesn’t conform to his narrow views, then twists any other comment and selectively quotes anything to support his false conclusion.  Then he uses the tactic of discrediting the other person saying that they are reverting to “personal attacks”, when it has been him all along who has initiated the slur in the first place.



tech/a said:


> Application isnt a priority----personally Moggie I doubt you trade---well consistently anyway.Which explains the lack of practical application.
> 
> Thats fine and NOT a personal attack simply an observation.




This is how he moves to attack the integrity of the person he is debating. 

 Apparently I don’t trade at all, and if I did, it couldn’t be profitable.  

And if it was profitable then there is a lack of application.  

And if there isn’t a lack of application, I’m hiding something because I’m not posting up all my IP (that’s Intellectual Property – basically original ideas).  

If I post up a chart, then I’m not showing how you’d trade a set up.  If I outline how to position in an example, then he reverts to the line about Gann practitioners launching personal attacks – you can’t satisfy him with logic.  What he wants is for you to agree with his view.  It is just like a religious fanatic – reality has no relevance.

This is his never ending circular approach.  But he never actually addresses the inherent logic raised by anyone else if it refutes his inflexible viewpoint.  This is why I have concluded that it is pointless discussing anything with tech.


----------



## Magdoran (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

*Zinc Campaign Explained.*


This is the full Zinc campaign as it unfolded chronologically, warts and all.  It was quite accurate in places, and failed in others in terms of my evolving ability to interpret the time cycles effectively, but interestingly, the cycle remained valid throughout once it was correctly calibrated.

There are two levels that people seem to want to understand: one is about the analysis, the other is how to use this analysis in order to build a trading system with entry and exit rules.

I maintain that in both there is a lot of flexibility depending on the individuals goals, time frame, money management and expectancy choices, choice of instrument, level of risk tolerance, and any other relevant preferences (just like any style of trading).

In later posts I will explain my trading rules for translating the analysis into trades by dividing the posted charts up into scenario sections.  This will illustrate an example of how the analysis can be used in order to develop a trading plan.  This is because trying to fit everything including all the charts into one post would be too large, hence I’ll deal with the whole campaign in installments.

Below is the chronological order of posts that everyone can access at their leisure, and I’d suggest getting a zinc chart, and following the action with the posts.  For the best results, if you have a “training mode” function to wind back the data to the day of the post, this would really help you to put yourself in the position of the analyst without the latter price action.  Don’t forget that the post dates are a day ahead of the actual price action because of the trading time for the LME market:  


*Chronological posts with Zinc charts:*

*17 February 2007: ZFX – Zinifex thread. *



Magdoran said:


> How long will the decline last, how long will the basing last, and how much momentum would a wave 5 have, and for how long?  Too early for me to forecast this currently – but I’m working on it.




*23 February 2007:  ZFX – Zinifex thread.*



Magdoran said:


> Latest Update to the Zinc musings chart...




*27 February 2007:  ZINC - The Metal for 2007*



Magdoran said:


> Current Zinc chart...




*27 February 2007:  ZFX – Zinifex*



Magdoran said:


> Zinc may be about to turn here.  Working on ZFX itself, but think if Zinc does pull back, so will ZFX in line with Zinc.
> 
> The 28th Feb +/- one trading day will be a significant time point, and if we get a high here, should see a continuation of the bear drive along the concept in the chart.
> 
> It is conceivable that there is a retest of the high around 12 March, or could see a low here.  This is a key increment, and will help to verify the scenario outlined in the existing chart.




*05 March 2007:  ZFX – Zinifex*

Key chart!!!



Magdoran said:


> Here’s my current musings on Zinc.
> ...
> Here’s my “each way bet” as the peons would say – this baby is going down





*18 April 2007:  ZINC - The Metal for 2007*

Key Chart!!!



Magdoran said:


> The previous forecast for Zinc was invalidated when a strong drive occurred towards the end of the cycle (15 April target).  The recent price action finding SUPPORT at a HIGHER LOW near the 15th April may well be very bullish, and suggest a very short sharp bullish drive.
> 
> This kind of premature termination in the price action with cycles has happened before.  I have been studying these in many markets and different eras for quite a while now, and have built a range of caveats for determining trading probabilities.  This pattern indicates a fast move UP, usually into a key time increment and price level.  In the chart below I have projected key times and prices using a standard method.
> 
> ...




*18 April 2007:  ZINC - The Metal for 2007*

Key Chart



Magdoran said:


> chart.





*02 May 2007:  ZINC - The Metal for 2007*



Magdoran said:


> Latest Zinc chart.




*04 May 2007:  ZINC - The Metal for 2007*



Magdoran said:


> Latest Zinc Chart





*15 May 2007:  ZINC - The Metal for 2007*



Magdoran said:


> There is support in time and price as indicated in the attached chart.  If this is a reversal as I suspect it is (or near to this level and time), this should yield a strong bullish drive into the 21 May (or beyond – hence have to see how Zinc moves into this date).




*17 May 2007:  ZINC - The Metal for 2007*



Magdoran said:


> Awwww, Frig, Zinc’s taking a bath – down over 4% - Really got the turning point wrong.
> 
> Learned something though – If the price action falls through these key points I’ve been working on like it did last night, it’s telling you something – there’s more to come! (in this case downside).
> 
> ...





That concludes the chronological links to the actual posts.  I will break this campaign into move by move scenarios, and show how to utilise this analysis and apply it to actual trading.

Please understand that doing this is a heavily time consuming activity, and I will update the scenarios as time permits.



Regards,



Magdoran


----------



## Magdoran (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



Trade_It said:


> Tech,
> 
> I see your point I am using Gann principles in my trading now, not to the same extent as Mag, but the basics i use are helping a lot.
> 
> ...



Hello Trade IT, 

I really appreciate your input and support!!!


Mag


----------



## Edwood (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

cheers for the details Magdoran, interesting to track through it, am sure it must've taken a bit of time to pull it together - on a Sunday too!

had a look at one of your first Zinc charts & put a fib extension on wave A, projected to around 4,071 (thereabouts, I can't see the figures very well) on a 1.618 extension into C.  Can't tell from the chart but would be interesting to see if there is any fib pattern in the no. of days for each move.

then went down a few of your posts & the C extension target comes up pretty similar to yours.  no. of days could help to determine possible days to target & hence a time date.

have to say I don't profess to being an Elliott expert, find the fibs useful tho.  out of interest - where did it turn from when it dropped 4%?

thanks again for taking the time to post and apologies to the XAO thread for getting so far off topic

Ed


----------



## Magdoran (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



steven1234 said:


> Theres only one way to settle this, post your time and price estimates and a brief explanation behind your methodology.....  We can revist in a few weeks and determine who was closer.



Hello steven1234,


You raise an excellent suggestion here.  

But tech is unlikely to do this because his main style is based on lagging indicators.  While I think he is improving in Elliott Wave, I suspect that he will weigh the odds of him making a better forecast than me, and conclude that the odds aren’t in his favour.

We have to remember that none of us have a crystal ball or the Holy Grail.  All we have are methods that aim to achieve a consistently profitable edge.

My style is about trading swings with derivatives.  Tech uses margin on shares, and has only recently been looking at CFDs.  I’ve been trading all sorts of derivatives for years, and have in the past been contracted to conduct seminars in this area, hence the ground is not “even” between us on this basis.

But as Trade IT correctly says, our styles are chalk and cheese.  Ironically, I think that for the type of bull market we’ve had since late 2002, his approach has been very successful and worked well in a nicely trending market.  I have on previous occasions saluted his work on Reefcap with techtrader.

He at one point seemed to see some merit in what I was doing on the “Improving Chart Analysis” thread, but has since reverted to attack after I’d called the February 2007 high, and I suspect he’d been caught long with a lot of margin based positions based on his abusive PM he sent over, which triggered a deluge of denial about the call because he missed it and I didn’t.

Funny how some people channel their anger and shoot the messenger/prophet sometimes.

He just doesn’t get it.  He still struggles with EW, and doesn’t really understand counter trends.  Don’t get me wrong, in some ways he is an excellent technical analyst, he sees some patterns really well, and knows how to trade them.  But there are patterns like ending diagonals, and especially time based counter trends he just doesn’t see.

Because he can’t see them, he believes they don’t exist.  Over on RC he had a huge bun fight with some (mostly not very good) Gann traders, and since then attacked anyone using even one tiny component of “Gann”.  To my knowledge though, he has never researched this area, or thoroughly read any Gann originals, or any of McLaren’s detailed course work (he has followed the commentary on McLaren’s site, but without understanding how it all works).

If I was to blindly attack techtrader, then I’d be guilty of the same flaw as tech, but I recognise the benefits and logic behind it.  Personally I can see flaws in it, but realise that technical analysis involves trade offs.  Hence I can see the positive elements in his work, and have never criticised his efforts, unlike how he has attacked mine.

He also tried to make out that I’m a “Gannist”, a label I reject.  I’m a chartist first, and use elements of analysis from a range of sources, including Gann.  But I’ve taken what works for me, and rejected other bits.  But what I did was to actually do the research, so I can sort the wheat from the chaff in Gann, Elliott, and anything else that I take the time to study.  He won’t do this.

But you can see his reactions to my posts (using the same user name) over on RC, and just read his rude and abusive comments there.  I remained polite for a long time before I finally had enough of him.  

Because of his personal attacks, this has cemented a personal view.  It’s this simple. I have no more time for him.


Regards


Magdoran


----------



## tech/a (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*

Thanks Moggie re Zinc chart.

Wasnt that hard was it!

Lookforward to whatever else you put up on it.

So basically from the analysis on THIS chart there wasnt a profitable trade.

Eh fair enough.


----------



## Magdoran (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



theasxgorilla said:


> Apologies for ranting on topic.
> 
> Another way is to say it is that a doubling of the index from 1000 to 2000 is represented on the Y-Axis by the same 'length' of price as a doubling from 2000 to 4000 or 4000 to 8000.
> 
> ...



Yup, TAG,


Good points, and I’m sorry this little “firefight” has interceded on this thread.

I did consider posting on another thread…  I did start off on topic, so I hope you don’t mind if I extrapolate some ideas on Zinc as well as the XAO to throw some technical alternative perspectives up.  

I figured if I yet again spell this stuff out for those who have missed it in the older threads, it may help them to see the logic for the XAO forecasts.


Regards


Magdoran

P.S. I responded to the focus on Zinc here by the way...  I didn't select it...


----------



## >Apocalypto< (17 June 2007)

*Re: XAO Analysis*



Magdoran said:


> Hello Trade IT,
> 
> I really appreciate your input and support!!!
> 
> ...




No worries Magdoran, any time, I don't think you need to buckle to any pushing or shoving.

keep up the great work.


----------



## tech/a (18 June 2007)

Moggie.
I notice that the Gann grids in this case dont start from a* significant low * but from the higher low which you placed as a critical low which has so far held.

Surely this would have had a bearing on your time analysis and you could also have selected other significant Lows or Highs to give you timelines,there may have even been some confluence.

Why *THAT *low?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (18 June 2007)

Tech,

What does it matter?

I for one can't understand why anyone would want to disclose their ways for fear of it being compromised in the mass market.


----------



## tech/a (18 June 2007)

*Snake *we are talking about Gann Time analysis and moggies use of it.
I am simply using an example which he has made public.

A simple generic question with regard to his use of tools in this case Gann Time grids.
This and other questions I have directed towards the author dont require exposing of any "secrets".

*Its just common discussion I would have thought.*

It appears those working with Gann have an in built negativity toward any questions.


----------



## krisbarry (18 June 2007)

Oh my god Just started reading this thread and the egos are out in full force, I might just crawl under a rock and let them go for it


----------



## chops_a_must (18 June 2007)

Stop_the_clock said:


> Oh my god Just started reading this thread and the egos are out in full force, I might just crawl under a rock and let them go for it




My e-p*nis is bigger than your e-p*nis! SING IT!!!


----------



## krisbarry (18 June 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> My e-p*nis is bigger than your e-p*nis! SING IT!!!




lol...too funny


----------



## tech/a (19 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> Moggie.
> I notice that the Gann grids in this case dont start from a* significant low * but from the higher low which you placed as a critical low which has so far held.
> 
> Surely this would have had a bearing on your time analysis and you could also have selected other significant Lows or Highs to give you timelines,there may have even been some confluence.
> ...




Anyone at all answer this question?


----------



## Magdoran (19 June 2007)

I was planning to go through the whole Zinc campaign chronologically to deal with a range of issues in depth and how to deal with a range of contingencies in a campaign like manner, which was how the actual events unfolded in order to maintain the integrity of the analysis and application.

I was also planning to go though some other pertinent example such as the DAX example from the recent 02 June high to the 08 June support as published.  It’s this simple, short the DAX for a counter trend play on the 04 June, and wind out that short on 08 June.

Given the recent comments and the incessant demand for pieces of the puzzle in piecemeal which won’t really be of any benefit, I just think, “what’s the point”? But I may as well address the nonsense once and for all and leave it at that. 

So instead I’ll abandon the methodical approach I was going to do in instalments outlining the whole campaign when time allowed (which I don’t have much of currently), and just quickly answer this specific question in text without explaining the whole trading rule approaches available and gloss over these and let people work it out for themselves.  

I can’t currently post any Zinc charts since Hubb has stuffed the data up yet again, and all my Zinc charts have corrupted data.

Hence I’ll make this one quick comment and that will be an end to it.

So for the chart posted on the 18 April 2007 for Zinc, it is clear to see that key support was identified for Zinc on the 16 of April, and a long was signalled then or by the 17th April.  

There were three entry options open based on the pattern and the apparently valid time cycle in play:

1.	Buy into weakness on either 13 April or 16 April given that April 15 was a cycle termination date.

2.	Buy on confirmation on the 17th of April.

3.	Wait for a pull back and buy into weakness after the 17th of April.


Failure was signalled with a close below the 13 April higher low.  A stop logically would have been set below this low.  

Another stop would be set based on time and pattern – the 02 June being the best case bullish scenario given the price action continued into this date.  21 May was the highest probability for a blow off “jamming up” move from the pattern.

These patterns can truncate in time at 50% of the time increment – in English, 03 May was the half way point between 15 April and 21 May, hence if the price action was bullish an exit half to lock in profits would be a major consideration.

The pattern exhibited in the chart posted above suggested that resistance was very likely on this day (03 May) or +/- one trading day, hence the price action called for a half exit or some kind of profit taking or hedging in my view at this point.  In English take profits at close on 03 May - that time angle looked pretty compelling for a bounce in my view.

The idea of partial exits is based on a position/swing trading notion that even the most promising patterns can either temporarily pull against the forecast direction, or can fail, hence the idea is to avoid the situation of being in profit at one point, only to see an adverse move and then making a loss.

This approach can be based on doubling – exiting half to cover the initial cost of the position allowing the second half to be essentially a free trade since a loss in no longer possible.  But if the pattern indicates further upside, the exit half (or one third) can be delayed depending on the situation and what rules have been adopted.

Hedging can be performed with options by selling calls or buying puts in a limited risk configuration (diagonal ratio back spreads, straight puts, etc depending on the best risk to reward proposition depending on available options, volatility, and duration of time value in strikes – essentially sometimes there is not enough time in the front month depending on where the expiry is in relation to the trading date).

In this case, there was a compelling pattern on 04 May to either fully hedge or exit the position since the price level was near a key increment, and just after a time increment where this kind of pattern can pull back.  The idea being to re-enter a long on a confirmed higher low with the two time targets as time exit points.

What happens with some cycles is that the actual price low can be on or near the cycle low date, or it can be on or near a time increment either before the cycle low date, or after.  In this case the actual price low came before the cycle low date, and in fact was a higher low to the major 02 February low.

Look at Zinc in a weekly chart, and the pattern was bullish into the top, hence was the bearish activity post the top a counter trend to the bullish drive in the longer time frame, or was it a completion of sorts and the start of a bear market for Zinc?  

Either are possible, but what is more likely?  The price action and pattern look more like a correction to a longer term bullish trend, and the norm from this kind of pattern/price action is for a strong short lived bullish drive to occur (McLaren “jamming up” move).

If you look through a host of charts with this kind of pattern, the underlying tends to rally strongly briefly, then retest the low over a longer period of time, base for a long period of time, then trend again (usually bullishly).  Each of these phases has times and patterns that can define a probability.  I have been developing a catalogue of these patterns.

From this pattern I determined that there was a high probability of a sharp bullish drive since the 15th of April was a cycle low, but was a higher low in price.  The pattern and time cycle gave a high probability of a strong sharp short lived bullish response, just what you want if swing/position trading.

I had earlier identified a valid bearish time cycle was evident and got the final calibration to this on 26 February 2007.  This allowed for a fairly accurate projection of time increments into the future, and during the cycle primary probability for the termination of the cycle was 15 April.

Now the concept here is that a cycle is like a flavour – hence in the cycle period the overall flavour would be bearish in the daily with 15 April the end of that phase.  But the longer term “flavour” for Zinc I thought was bullish. Don’t forget that cycles and price action although inherently related are two different things – the actual price low can precede or lag the cycle low (a common mistake made by novice time cycle traders). 

Hence the bearish price action in the daily was a counter trend in effect in the longer time frame to the bullish pattern in the monthly and weekly charts.  This is a great advantage having a way of measuring in time how long a campaign in the daily chart may last.

This allows for options for instance to be sold with good premium at or near the money in order to generate income from the fairly flat pattern as was forecast.

Once the price action rallied hard on 04 April, this constituted a risk to the bearish forecast, and invalidated the projection for a capitulation move down.  Once this happened, and the higher low came in right on the cycle low as a higher low in price with a bullish pattern, everything lined up for a short term bullish position.

But the dominant pattern that comes out of such strong bearish counter trends in a longer term bullish pattern is a short sharp move up which fails and retests the low with a more gentle move down, but usually fails to take out the low and then bases, then moves bullishly again.

The problem is timing and how the price action will play out.  At least there is a model that can be used for this, and the way the underlying trades into the key time increments can constitute support of resistance just as price increments can.

If you view the charts there are price increments too.  The patterns that develop within this area, and the resulting “time angles” can reveal much about probabilities.

So, once the 04 May high was reached, at least half should have been taken off the table.  When the move down occurred, a stop loss needed to be set in both time and price.  The projected times were exit points if bullish after a brief counter trend, or if the “jamming up” move was truncated in time (failed near the 03 May time increment), then a price stop would have required an exit of any remaining part of the position.

Trying to trade the counter trends in this kind of situation is highly risky (hence I don’t do it) but for those that do, they really need to take profits at obvious points of support in time and price gingerly.

The pattern suggested a bullish campaign was still the higher probability in the longer time frame, hence bearish plays were essentially counter trend plays.  This means any swing trade is going against the trend, hence they are fast and risky, and profits need to be taken decisively especially when key time and price levels are evident.  The recent DAX example is a counter trend play from a sharp high with a fast pull back into support.  This requires precision trading.

Once Zinc pulled back over the 4% move overnight, this signalled that the jamming up move was definitely over, hence the price action and pattern was likely to be sideways and basing for quite some time.  The time cycle here is now very valid, and although I wouldn’t do it, could be very useful for day trading off support and resistance in time and price.  Certainly selling positions with premium (probably puts – and I only trade protected positions incidentally - not naked!) would be a consideration, but not one I’d do when there are trending markets to trade.

I hope that makes sense.  This is all I’ll have time for, for quite a while...  Our friend has demanded and derailed again, so this is the last time I will address his nonsense.  So sorry, I won’t have time to do the whole campaign now.


Mag.


----------



## ducati916 (19 June 2007)

*Mag's baby*

A bit of a generalization but, for the most part traders trade *Price*. They haven't quite caught onto trading time.

As for trading both simultaneously, that complicates matters even further.
Unless you are prepared to hand-hold, you're going to encounter a lot of resistance.

How about that for a hindsight call! But I am late to the party.

jog on
d998


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (19 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> It appears those working with Gann have an in built negativity toward any questions.




I am not surprised considering the amount of negativity towards practitioners. All methods have their inherent weaknesses, destructiveness etc.

From my perspective, Gann approaches have more reason for being than many others. EW seems to me to be voodooo of the hindsight kind, rather than forward. Many will dispute this. I still study it and am taking my time. I am still trying to reduce my prejudice with regard to the voodoo aspect. Perhaps you could do the same with regard to Gann practitioners.

My handbag is worn out and need to purchase a new one before i comment further.
Have a nice day.


----------



## >Apocalypto< (19 June 2007)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> I am not surprised considering the amount of negativity towards practitioners. All methods have their inherent weaknesses, destructiveness etc.
> 
> From my perspective, Gann approaches have more reason for being than many others. EW seems to me to be voodooo of the hindsight kind, rather than forward. Many will dispute this. I still study it and am taking my time. I am still trying to reduce my prejudice with regard to the voodoo aspect. Perhaps you could do the same with regard to Gann practitioners.
> 
> ...





I am with you here Snake this is worn out and getting silly.

One thing I will say is I never see Mag attacking the fundermetals of any sytem. I see polite questions but never demands.

Peace to all and good trading, as right now there is plenty of money to be made. Enjoy.


----------



## tech/a (19 June 2007)

*Moggie.*

Thanks for the explaination.

I now see that the 15th was a cycle termination date and thats why you chose that date to start the Gann Grid.Relative to the significant low.

I can see where confirmation could be necessary to trade.
I can also see where you could trade off the time and price lines particularly if all is running to plan.

*Snake*



> I am still trying to reduce my prejudice with regard to the voodoo aspect. Perhaps you could do the same with regard to Gann practitioners.




I dont think it or any analysis is Voodoo.
What I do find is that its *application* is difficult to follow---but moggs has been a help there.

Its application can be involved but in the hands of the trained simple.
Just like one who is conversant in Elliott/Market profile or P&F.

To actually explain all thought processes makes it extremely involved.
Something which the mind (moggies in this case) can see in pretty well an instant.


----------



## Magdoran (19 June 2007)

ducati916 said:


> *Mag's baby*
> 
> A bit of a generalization but, for the most part traders trade *Price*. They haven't quite caught onto trading time.
> 
> ...



Hello Duc,



How are you?

Oh, I agree, this trading style at its apex is not for amateurs, that’s for sure.

It’s definitely not a “plug and play” style, although the basic charting concepts McLaren covers are quite accessible to people wishing to improve their charting skills, and can make a huge difference to their performance even without the move evolved materials in the “Time Factor” DVD, or wave structure (EW) for that matter.

The material in the “Time Factor” is suitable for people who are prepared to seriously study and apply it.  But if someone has good visualisation skills and imagination, and can develop good charting skills that are effective, it is a logical extension.

So yes, you’d have to “hand-hold” for the more advanced material, hence it is not uncommon for people aspiring to becoming effective time cycle traders to seek out mentors.


Regards


Magdoran


----------



## Magdoran (19 June 2007)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> I am not surprised considering the amount of negativity towards practitioners. All methods have their inherent weaknesses, destructiveness etc.
> 
> From my perspective, Gann approaches have more reason for being than many others. EW seems to me to be voodooo of the hindsight kind, rather than forward. Many will dispute this. I still study it and am taking my time. I am still trying to reduce my prejudice with regard to the voodoo aspect. Perhaps you could do the same with regard to Gann practitioners.
> 
> ...



Hello Snake,


Good to see your research is progressing…

You’re right about the negativity, I weathered this for a long time on Reefcap, but some people seemed polite and receptive to an extent, although sceptical, which I can respect.

Interestingly some of the people from that site actually PM’d me on this site recognising the various calls I’d made ahead of time, recognising that there were benefits to the style I was displaying.

I have no problem for instance when people like Lesm raised some questions such as the ones on the “Improving Chart Analysis” thread, but did so respectfully and politely, with a genuine interest (hence I’ve got a lot of time for Les).

The people I have a problem with are in two main categories: the peons who make uninformed comments saying things like the forecast analysis is an “each way bet” without understanding the core concepts underling the approach, and then there is a special category for serial pests – the archetypal example of this is our resident Piranha-Duck.

By the way, you may find when you go through the Foundations DVD where the benefits of wave structure approaches can really help.  Things like ending diagonals, nesting patterns, terminal structures, etc can really help.  I’m beginning to think Neely is onto something in the time/price proportions too.  This is certainly worth investigating, and is entirely compatible, and I hope a refinement to the work I’m doing.

The problem with both EW and Gann is that they are multifaceted, and very much an art.  It can really help to have a good mentor spell some things out that aren’t obvious, plus they require a hell of a lot of studying, both actual charts and theory, and then how to apply this.  This is quite involved, and that’s why I say it takes at least 3 years in most cases (if not more) to master the basics, let alone become a consistent trader.

So, I think you’re on the right track, studying and thinking about it.  That’s the way forward.

Good to see you working through the ideas!


Kind Regards


Magdoran


----------



## Magdoran (19 June 2007)

Just a quick couple of points that may be of interest… which is how you can use two different disciplines such as Elliott Wave and Gann to help to decipher the market.

Have a look in the chart on the 27 February post 1462 on the “ZFX- Zinifex” thread and you will see that I was expecting a bearish reversal on or near the heavily marked horizontal black line (price increment).



Magdoran said:


> Zinc may be about to turn here




Then look at the chart posted on 05 March post 1473 on the “ZFX- Zinifex” thread:



Magdoran said:


> Here’s my current musings on Zinc




What you can see on the March 05 chart is what I anticipated to be a 1-2,1-2,1-2 Prechter version of an Elliott Wave nesting pattern.

Interestingly nesting patterns and ending diagonals can appear very similar.  At the time, due to the cycle, I thought that at the end of the cycle there would be a bearish capitulation to wash out the sellers, and then for a bullish resumption to occur after the 15 April.

The capitulation of course didn’t happen, but look at the path that Zinc actually took, which was pretty close to the anticipated pattern for about 35 odd calendar days before the 04 Bullish breakout.  So it was possible to enter sideways positions here with options in order to generate premium for example.

What happened of course was that this was an ending diagonal, not a nesting pattern.  But if you can see these EW patterns, they can give you some important clues to what’s going on.  Ending diagonals often result in a violent and strong move in the opposite direction - they can be a key reversal.

Once that higher low came in on the 15th April, and that ending diagonal was at the base, this made a strong case for a strong bullish drive, which in this case is what transpired.

Also, if you look at both the major cycle dates (the dates in the upper part of the chart), and then look at the “harmonic” dates in the lower section of the chart, you will find that all except one resulted in a change of trend temporarily in the daily.  Interesting huh? (Just think about day traders and very short term traders using this to position from!)

Sorry I can’t put a chart up currently with the corrupt data, hoping to have this fixed soon.


Regards


Magdoran


----------



## Joe Blow (19 June 2007)

Come on gents, lets keep the handbags in check, shall we? 

I understand that disagreements often occur when discussing varying methodologies and theory as everyone has their own approach and area of expertise.

However, personal attacks, name calling and/or excessive antagonism are not required and are in fact against the site rules, so lets see if we can move this thread forward without them. The co-operation of all participants would be appreciated.

The mods and I hate breaking up brawls on the forums. We really do. No matter what we do we get accused of taking sides when all we really want is for the discussion to progress in a constructive, respectful way.

So thank you all in advance for your co-operation!

P.S. Take it from me, sometimes its best just to step away from the keyboard and go and do something else for a while when you feel your frustration levels rising. Its just not worth getting all worked up about. Jeez, now I'm starting to feel like Dr. Phil!


----------



## theasxgorilla (19 June 2007)

ducati916 said:


> *Mag's baby*
> 
> A bit of a generalization but, for the most part traders trade *Price*. They haven't quite caught onto trading time.
> 
> ...




Pretty good 11th hour synopsis Duc!

So while we're out _hand bagging_, and getting toward the topic of time analysis...does anybody have any thoughts on Ray Merriman and his time-cycle work...does it align with the stuff you're doing Mags?  I know a couple of practitioners.  Curiously when it comes to trading I think that 90+% of traders actually do ultimately use price (movement, rate-of-change, support/resistance) for their trading decisions, and then they bolt on an exotic analysis technique to get their 'edge'.


----------



## wayneL (19 June 2007)

*Time & Price*

We all understand trading price. I understand trading time very well in the context of options. (Theta etc) I have a concept of trading time combined with price (whether that concept is the same as Gann's I have no idea, I think not)

Where I am like a mule at a new gate is the concept of trading time exclusively (leaving aside options) on a linear instrument like straight stocks or futures as per Duc's post.

How do you trade time and not price?


----------



## theasxgorilla (19 June 2007)

theasxgorilla said:


> and then they bolt on an exotic analysis technique to get their 'edge'.




I should add, whether that 'edge' be actual or psychological (yes, only in the practitioners head).


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 June 2007)

Joe Blow said:


> Come on gents, lets keep the handbags in check, shall we?
> 
> I understand that disagreements often occur when discussing varying methodologies and theory as everyone has their own approach and area of expertise.
> 
> ...




Dr Phil,

I think you and the moderators are doing a terrific job with this forum.
Keep up the good work.

Kind regards
Snake

Mags,

Good to hear from you.

I believe you have a style that you find works and you understand why it works. That is all that matters for you and the rest doesn't mean anything. With that said I am sure others could try the same philosophy, because what works for one may not work for another. (sounds like a riddle)

Always appreciate your efforts. 

Kind regards
Snake


----------



## Edwood (20 June 2007)

wayneL said:


> *Time & Price*
> 
> We all understand trading price. I understand trading time very well in the context of options. (Theta etc) I have a concept of trading time combined with price (whether that concept is the same as Gann's I have no idea, I think not)
> 
> ...




I doubt you could and I don't think that's what the intention is - I might be missing something but you'd always want to check what the price is doing. 

if I were using time & price & my price were hit but time was out by a few hours / days / weeks I wouldn't be hanging about waiting


----------



## wayneL (20 June 2007)

Edwood said:


> I doubt you could and I don't think that's what the intention is - I might be missing something but you'd always want to check what the price is doing.
> 
> if I were using time & price & my price were hit but time was out by a few hours / days / weeks I wouldn't be hanging about waiting




Well that's the way I would look at it. But I often hear this "time is more important than price" quoted. I just don't get it and nobody seems willing to expand on this concept.

Genuine question here.


----------



## sails (20 June 2007)

wayneL said:


> Well that's the way I would look at it. But I often hear this "time is more important than price" quoted. I just don't get it and nobody seems willing to expand on this concept.
> 
> Genuine question here.




Wayne, I think the problem is that there’s no easy way to answer your question fully without re-writing the text books.  Similar complexity to someone asking “what’s an option; what’s volatility, etc?” !!   You give the dictionary answer – only to get more questions – in the end it’s easier to refer to text books, web sites, etc.  

Another issue in learning about time is that there are so many different methods, and I don’t know where this knowledge can be obtained as freely as options education.  Probably Gann’s book “How to Make Profits in Commodities” would help.  Might be available from a local library – not an easy read though!

Mag has done a great job giving a lot out for free, obviously spending an enormous amount of time with detailed posts and charts to try and illustrate the use of time – but the sheer complexity of it seems to only add to the confusion of readers.  It’s not for everyone, that’s for sure!



> ..."time is more important than price...




I think this would be better understood if it read “time pressure points” vs. “price pressure points”.  My understanding of price pressure points is where support levels cluster.   I think one would have to be an extremely skilled technician to find that time works better than price  – I only use it as confirmation – and my use of time is much simpler than Mag’s!  

Here is a very *simplified example of comparing time to price*:

Suppose there is a stock that has been steadily climbing with a couple of major pullbacks along the way.  The market starts to turn back down again and we want to establish potential support levels.  So we apply some fib levels from the high to the extreme low – then again from the same high to the next higher low – then again from the high to the highest low.   We see that there is a “cluster” of fib lines at say 38%, 50% and 62% respectively from those last three measurements.  We also note that this level lines up with a previous top and possibly one of the lows.  I think that most would understand that as being a potential “support level” or sometimes known as a price “pressure point” or “cluster” and could potentially turn the market IF it gets there.

A similar thing can be applied with time.  Instead of measuring previous price swings as in the above example, the time between previous tops to tops; lows to lows; highs to lows (ranges); various squares from major highs/lows .  These (and fractions of them)  are then extended out in time to see where the “clusters” or “time pressure points” fall.  Mag’s charts have illustrated the use of some of these types of techniques.

A lot of time (no pun intended!) is required to put it all together and then to interpret it is the difficult part, IMO.  I think many traders don’t see the value in putting in so much effort when it still doesn’t guarantee 100% success.  But then there are those like Mag and others that thrive on it! Anyway, hope this helps a little – been sitting here typing for too long now – achilles tendon injury still causing some grief – can’t believe how slow it is to recover!

Cheers,

Margaret.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 June 2007)

sails said:


> Wayne, I think the problem is that there’s no easy way to answer your question fully without re-writing the text books.  Similar complexity to someone asking “what’s an option; what’s volatility, etc?” !!   You give the dictionary answer – only to get more questions – in the end it’s easier to refer to text books, web sites, etc.
> 
> Another issue in learning about time is that there are so many different methods, and I don’t know where this knowledge can be obtained as freely as options education.  Probably Gann’s book “How to Make Profits in Commodities” would help.  Might be available from a local library – not an easy read though!
> 
> ...




Margaret,

Thanks for the very good post.
Take care of your heel as I believe it does take a while.

Regards
Snake


----------



## tech/a (20 June 2007)

*Margaret.*

Strong points which I can associate with.
I'm on Wayne's side of the fence.

Both time and price analysis works from significant highs and significant lows.
There are also various timeframes in which these will occur.
Confluence of points in both time and price do bring about an area of confidence.
My point is and always has been to use either as stand alone or both in conjunction as a stand alone trading tool is from what I have seen impossible to apply with enough consistency to claim an edge.

As Wayne says---so many points---- so many what if's.

Is both Time and Price necessary to be profitable.
I dont think so.
Is it a "Handy tool"---- yes.
Do you *NEED *to be an expert in application of both time and price to be profitable even profitable well above Market performance.---I dont think so.
In conjunction with other analysis fine,and "Handy" Stand alone like trying to drive a car on 2 wheels not 4.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 June 2007)

*Tech*,

You use EW and Aget. Do you use any time elements at all?


----------



## tech/a (20 June 2007)

No.
Ive been looking at application but cant see anything of practical value.
I'm no expert in E/W either but can see and have applied it with excellent practical value.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> No.
> Ive been looking at application but cant see anything of practical value.
> I'm no expert in E/W either but can see and have applied it with excellent practical value.




Not even Miner's stuff?

I am still exploring it.


----------



## Edwood (20 June 2007)

here's an example chaps of fib numbers applying to time in EW (in this case days) for FTSE.  got this overnight.  next possible time target 27 June.  notice how the fib numbers recur on retraces & the impulses.  but I'd give the price fibs more weight, personally


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 June 2007)

Edwood said:


> here's an example chaps of fib numbers applying to time in EW (in this case days) for FTSE.  got this overnight.  next possible time target 27 June.  notice how the fib numbers recur on retraces & the impulses.  but I'd give the price fibs more weight, personally




Thank you Edwood.


----------



## tech/a (20 June 2007)

Edwood.

Thanks for the example.
looking at practical application then we are in a wave 5 of a longer term wave 3.Within the Wave 5 we are looking at possibly being in the corrective wave 4 phase of the internal wave structure.

So I presume your long this chart.
Looking to trade LONG into the 27th of June where we should have a culmination of the Wave 5.

Will watch with interest.
Please post up a chart on or around there.

If this was reliable then you'd be ready with the cash for a buy once the wave 4 completes to trade heavily with confidence into both wave 5 completion and the time line June 27th.

Edwood is that the way youd see it?


----------



## Edwood (20 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> Edwood.
> 
> Thanks for the example.
> looking at practical application then we are in a wave 5 of a longer term wave 3.Within the Wave 5 we are looking at possibly being in the corrective wave 4 phase of the internal wave structure.
> ...




Hi Tech - I don't have a position in FTSE and don't trade daily views - this is just an example that I got in the post today that had time on it so thought I'd share it.

looking at the EW stuff - yes assuming I was long, I'd be looking to hold the long up to the wave 5 fib target.  from here I wouldn't look to add - wave 5's can truncate, and we've had the meat of wave iii of 5 so the best part of the move is theoretically over.  I'd look to close longs at the wave 5 fib levels, and wait for confirmation for a retrace.  or depending on the action at the w5 fib (e.g., selling spike / key reversal day) I might jsut go short there - cos the retraces are usually quick.

the fact that the analyst here has a fib number of days into June 27 is neither here nor there for me, I'll be watching the price action.  I know the analyst and I doubt he'd be selling on the 27th if it looked like continuing on up!

would be interesting to see if the Gann crew can pin any time significance to that date as well?

sure thing will post an update around that date

Ed


----------



## Edwood (20 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> Edwood.
> Looking to trade LONG into the 27th of June where we should have a culmination of the Wave 5.
> 
> If this was reliable then you'd be ready with the cash for a buy once the wave 4 completes to trade heavily with confidence into both wave 5 completion and the time line June 27th.




sorry should've said Tech - yes definitely a case for longs off the wave 4 fib targets for day / swing traders so maybe something to check out if you cover FTSE - this report is targeted at 'investment' clients fwiw


----------



## tech/a (20 June 2007)

yep fine Will watch.


----------



## sails (20 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> *Margaret.*
> 
> Strong points which I can associate with.
> I'm on Wayne's side of the fence..




Tech/a, no worries!  I'm not advocating the use of time as it is not for everyone - just trying to answer Wayne's question with some basic theory. 



> Both time and price analysis works from significant highs and significant lows.
> There are also various timeframes in which these will occur.
> Confluence of points in both time and price do bring about an area of confidence.
> My point is and always has been to use either as stand alone or both in conjunction as a stand alone trading tool is from what I have seen impossible to apply with enough consistency to claim an edge



From my own experience, I do agree.  There may well be a minority that are able to make it work for them as a stand alone, but I assume that most use time in conjunction with other techniques.



> As Wayne says---so many points---- so many what if's.



Agree, and one of the reasons it won't suit everyone. 



> Is both Time and Price necessary to be profitable.
> I dont think so.
> Is it a "Handy tool"---- yes.
> Do you *NEED *to be an expert in application of both time and price to be profitable even profitable well above Market performance.---I dont think so.
> In conjunction with other analysis fine,and "Handy" Stand alone like trying to drive a car on 2 wheels not 4.



Actually, I agree again - must be a small fence!


----------



## wayneL (20 June 2007)

Margaret,

Thanks for the reply. It really backs up my thoughts on "Time AND Price" rather than "Time is MORE important than Price".

One day I will delve further into this.

Cheers


----------



## sails (20 June 2007)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Margaret,
> 
> Thanks for the very good post.
> Take care of your heel as I believe it does take a while.
> ...



Glad you found the post helpful, Snake.  Yes, the heel will take a while yet - but grateful to have at least discarded the crutches and enjoying increasing mobility now.


----------



## sails (20 June 2007)

wayneL said:


> Margaret,
> 
> Thanks for the reply. It really backs up my thoughts on "Time AND Price" rather than "Time is MORE important than Price".
> 
> ...



Yep, it is fascinating stuff, Wayne!  But I can't say the use of time & price has been any more reliable than other methods - at least in my experience.  But then I only learned the basic methodology from Safety in the Market - was way too expensive to keep going with all the courses.


----------



## tech/a (20 June 2007)

sails said:


> Yep, it is fascinating stuff, Wayne!  But I can't say the use of time & price has been any more reliable than other methods - at least in my experience.




*My point exactly.*
Ive never had this proven otherwise by any exponent.

All very interesting but when applied on trade after trade Ive not seen the analysis any more reliable than any other.

Yes used in conjunction with other analysis tools it provides another dimension,but Ive not seen an edge.(Demonstrated).

This is where Gannists get all tied in a knot.
Of course I want a demonstration of its effectiveness.
Just as I wanted one when I investigated systems testing 8 yrs ago.
The result was a profitable method which has well and truely proven to be worth the effort.
Same when Elliott was introduced AGAIN to me a few years ago.
Radge provided that in his FREE news letters prior to him opening the Chartist.
Result being I'm a member of the Chartist and am using/investigating and applying Elliott in my discretionary trading---Profitably and consistently.

Gann Well I keep asking and taking part in discussion just to be howelled down.
My only conclusion is that an *consistent edge *cannot be demonstrated.
Ive seen the work of a few and NONE have been as successful in ability to demonstrate the worth of further exploration of the topic like Radge in Elliot and Radge/Stevo and others in Systems developement.

I am open to discussion and demonstration.
From those who have posted on this thread I'm *NOT ALONE*

Thanks to those including Moggie for your efforts so far.


----------



## Magdoran (21 June 2007)

wayneL said:


> *Time & Price*
> 
> We all understand trading price. I understand trading time very well in the context of options. (Theta etc) I have a concept of trading time combined with price (whether that concept is the same as Gann's I have no idea, I think not)
> 
> ...




Hello Wayne,

“How do you trade time and not price?” – Great question, and one of the first ones I asked when I started looking at this area.

The answer is actually quite involved and yet simple at the same time oddly enough.  Margaret is spot on with this observation:



sails said:


> Wayne, I think the problem is that there’s no easy way to answer your question fully without re-writing the text books.  Similar complexity to someone asking “what’s an option; what’s volatility, etc?” !!   You give the dictionary answer – only to get more questions – in the end it’s easier to refer to text books, web sites, etc.




Given that most people accept that trying to answer such questions in a few lines in depth is not realistic, I will try to outline the core elements here as a starting point.

In simple terms it’s like trading an option with a rule to exit before 30 days to expiry.  You know you have to exit on “time”.  Imagine that there is a good “time” to enter an option, and a good time to “exit” an option irrespective of the price (think of an arbitrage situation that is time based).  It’s kind of like that, but the core is pattern, time and price, in that order.  But as you can imagine there is a lot to this…

To do this requires an understanding of several basic building blocks – pattern is at the core, especially the type of trend, determining when a trend is beginning, continuing and terminating is the key.  The corollary of this is an understanding of counter trends.  McLaren divides time cycles into two categories – cycles that run through all markets at all times, and localised cycles that have a limited life span for a specific sector, index/stock/commodity.

The idea is that if you can recognise these cycles and how they express themselves within the pattern of trend for the underlying, that this can allow you to enter and exit purely on time points, or a combination of time and price, or form a part of a perspective which results in an enhanced edge when trading or investing. 



wayneL said:


> … I often hear this "time is more important  than price" quoted. I just don't get it and nobody seems willing to expand on this concept.
> 
> Genuine question here.




Again, a really good central question, and exactly what you must answer in order to progress in this discipline.  The best exponents deal with exactly this conundrum.  What you are asking is very involved ironically, and it is easy to ask, but to answer simply will not do the concept justice. While I don’t have enough time to fully address this poignant question here to your satisfaction, here’s something to think about:  

Gann saw time and price as essentially the same thing…

This concept is of course open to interpretation, and has been debated by many revisionists – my guess is that he saw time and price as two sides of a coin, inherently linked, hence if you focus only on price then you are missing half the picture, and if you can trade just on price, then you can trade just on time, if you understand how markets trend (which entails a host of theories covered in his works such as the various “laws” including time cycles).  

Essentially you cannot separate time and price, so it is not that price isn’t an element in the process which of course it is, but it is the notion that timing is often more important than the price level in terms of formulating entries and exits.

The point is that once you understand patterns in the market, and recognise time cycles, and how the two relate, sometimes the relevance of price diminishes (it is always relevant though in terms of the profit you make, but I’m not talking about it in this sense, I’m talking about it in terms of pure entry and exit criteria). Personally I can often project time more accurately than price, based on the pattern for example.

At the core of understanding patterns is understanding patterns of trend and especially counter trends, in various time frames (daily, weekly, monthly for example, but you can extend either way – intraday, quarterly, etc), and this is without even considering the geometric techniques let alone time cycles.  This is sufficient to trade from in it’s own right, but can be greatly enhanced using the appropriate techniques.  So, the time cycle element is all about precision.


Regards


Magdoran


----------



## Magdoran (21 June 2007)

Edwood said:


> I doubt you could and I don't think that's what the intention is - I might be missing something but you'd always want to check what the price is doing.
> 
> if I were using time & price & my price were hit but time was out by a few hours / days / weeks I wouldn't be hanging about waiting




Good point Ed, and you’re right, there are times when price is more compelling than time, quite true – the art is in knowing which to use and when, separately or in tandem.  But there are times when time is in my view the dominant factor.  

The key above all of this for me though is PATTERN.  It is a holistic approach.  This is where Yogi and I seem to differ, my understanding is that he trades purely on time (although I am thinking about this viewpoint – I just don’t fully understand it yet).

Cheers

Mag


----------



## Magdoran (21 June 2007)

sails said:


> Another issue in learning about time is that there are so many different methods, and I don’t know where this knowledge can be obtained as freely as options education.  Probably Gann’s book “How to Make Profits in Commodities” would help.  Might be available from a local library – not an easy read though!




Exactly.  This is why this kind or approach has a more “select” audience.  You need to be able to spend enough time to get the concepts, and grasp the paradigm.

(Hello Margaret!  Sorry to hear about your tendon, I hope it heals soon. – thanks for posting your excellent perspective!).

At the core Gann talked about the importance of past patterns in the underlying (my words and interpretation), and understanding the ongoing cycles in markets.  McLaren talks about two distinct cycles – cycles that run through all markets at all times, and then cycles that are more localised and have a limited life span.

This is kind of like a leap of faith in a way because you have to decide philosophically wether you think there is an inherent order to markets or not.  Me, I’m about as convinced as a diehard sceptic can be that there is order in the markets, and I never really understood this to the extent I do now having deduced how to perceive time cycles. 

Is it worth it to spend a lot of time developing this skill?  I don’t know, it’s up to the individual.  I choose to, and others may not, and that’s fine by me.  I am not promoting this or saying it’s the way to go.  In fact for the majority, I’d agree that it is too hard.  My responses have purely been in defence of my work which has come under abusive attack, which I resent.  I have strived to demonstrate that the falsehoods raised have no bearing in fact.  I am confident that anyone with a logical mind will agree with this conclusion.

So, absolutely, you don’t need time cycles or geometric techniques to trade successfully.  You can use all sorts of methods and make a profit including using a blindfolded monkey with a dart board.  But who was comparing styles?  I wasn’t.  I was asked to expand on my thinking which I thought I did fairly thoroughly.  This I believe I have done to the best of my ability.


Regards


Magdoran


----------



## Magdoran (21 June 2007)

Edwood said:


> Hi Tech - I don't have a position in FTSE and don't trade daily views - this is just an example that I got in the post today that had time on it so thought I'd share it.
> 
> looking at the EW stuff - yes assuming I was long, I'd be looking to hold the long up to the wave 5 fib target.  from here I wouldn't look to add - wave 5's can truncate, and we've had the meat of wave iii of 5 so the best part of the move is theoretically over.  I'd look to close longs at the wave 5 fib levels, and wait for confirmation for a retrace.  or depending on the action at the w5 fib (e.g., selling spike / key reversal day) I might jsut go short there - cos the retraces are usually quick.
> 
> ...



Hello Ed,

Here's my current chart:  Key dates  - 19 July, 24 August, 05 September.  Bullish... at least till 19 July.


Regards


Magdoran


----------



## WaySolid (21 June 2007)

My key FTSE dates are: 

4 & 5 July  	18 July  	 
1 & 2 August 	15 August 	8 August

Tis a big secret why.....


----------



## ducati916 (21 June 2007)

wayneL said:


> Well that's the way I would look at it. But I often hear this "time is more important than price" quoted. I just don't get it and nobody seems willing to expand on this concept.
> 
> Genuine question here.




*enzo*

I'm not going to clutter the board with excessive discussion as it has moved on a little.

My version of time revolves around the "time value of money" rather than any patterns etc.

This is probably easiest to "trade" in the Bond market, rather than the stock market, altough fixed income securities [REIT's] can be adjusted to a duration measure.

jog on
d998


----------



## Edwood (21 June 2007)

Magdoran said:


> Hello Ed,
> 
> Here's my current chart:  Key dates  - 19 July, 24 August, 05 September.  Bullish... at least till 19 July.
> 
> ...




cheers Mag will keep an eye on it


----------



## tech/a (21 June 2007)

*Key dates--Great.*

Now what do you do with them in *practical application*.
Well Bullish through to the 19th July so LONG.

So time has given a bullish target through to then.
Will watch with interest as well.


----------



## Magdoran (21 June 2007)

I don’t know why this topic is being discussed.  It all started when questions were asked in the XAO Analysis thread about my recent forecasts I’d posted up.  Interestingly I had decided to truncate posting for a while in March, and had in fact intended to just keep up a small pulse on a few threads since I’d received some PMs requesting me to post up my thoughts every so often.

I had deliberately avoided having a direct confrontation with tech for a very long time (years on fact).  In reflection I could have been more dignified in my response in this thread I suppose, and for that I’m sorry that others saw an unpleasant outburst.  I just felt compelled to expose what was really going on, and call a spade a spade.

Having had time to reflect on this, I asked myself, “what’s the point of all this?”  My only interest has been to contribute ideas in an open and constructive way.  My intentions were positive and to offer some food for thought.  Apparently some people are not very tolerant or appreciative of anything that is “unorthodox” around here, and would prefer to censor anything that doesn’t conform to their view of the world.  I believe the interactions I have had with tech are negative and destructive, hence I have resolved to cease such intersections and focus on the positive.

It also strikes me as supremely ironic when people who are rooted in conventional thinking try to talk with authority about a subject they haven’t fully researched or investigated.  They can’t even marshal a logically argued case, but resort to assertion and repetition just like a heckler in a crowd.  Remember the adage “if a lie is repeated often enough, it becomes the truth”.

What I see is summed up very well by “Trade IT” is that he sees two people with different systems – chalk and cheese.  I have never attacked tech’s system or approach, although I have recognised flaws in it.  So, I don’t see the benefit of his “inquisition” here since he isn’t arguing logically, and certainly in my view is not helping the conveying of an involved topic.  He doesn’t address any of the logical arguments or counter arguments raised here, nor does he effectively raise a well marshalled and formulated logical critique.  So what’s the point of all this?

How do we determine “reliability” of any system objectively?  I don’t think this is possible, for what objective measure is there that will be reliable for all times into the future?  I don’t accept that the “orthodox” method of “back testing” constitutes an objective proof, or that these programmed methods guarantee future results.

How do we demonstrate “effectiveness” of any system or approach?  I would have thought that posting a price and time objective ahead of time would constitute and edge if the results were consistent?  

Given the examples I’ve put up, are these not evidence of the “effectiveness”, and if they are not, then what would constitute such “effectiveness”.  Who is to define this?  Who sets the standard?  How do we guarantee that any standard is truly “objective”?  

If two or more paradigms are involved which are not compatible, how can a meaningful discussion take place.  I would argue that such an interchange is unlikely to reach an agreed standard that is acceptable to the other (and so far this has not been achieved for several years now).  This is because the belief systems and values are so different for each paradigm, and is not unlike expecting people of different religions to find common ground.

However, being able to both perceive this “timescape” and the way markets vibrate through it kind of makes it hard to reverse my thinking and blank out my knowledge and return to the way the majority looks at the market (it’s a bit like Columbus sailing around the world and trying to return honestly to embracing the “flat earth” orthodoxy).  Is this what my detractors want? 

Then we see right below the chart that I was requested to put up, (and did so with very limited time, but in a sprit of goodwill stayed up very late to get this done) a totally ignorant and provocative comment made by one of my long term nemeses – the prying “Waysolid” who wants to spy into my private affairs no less - with insulting crap like “here are my secret dates”… even after the significant effort I’ve put in to explain a monumentally complex beast.  This petty nonsense comes out yet again.

What this kind of comment shows is that in “their” view it’s not ok for me to communicate with people who are interested in the topics I cover as I have done for quite a while now quietly in the background, actually ignoring tech for months until now, and it’s ok for them to attack my integrity and approach without responsibility for their actions, in any way they like with no logic in their sleights, and they believe they have every right to do this.  

It’s like the medical profession where you are a specialist in a particular field, or like the legal profession where you are say a Family law barrister, or a constitutional lawyer for example trying to explain detailed concepts in your speciality to those who are interested and who have specific questions in this specialist area.  

Then someone barrels in attacking your precise terms of your discipline making fun of it, but are not interested or versed in the field at all and are not prepared to contribute anything constructive about it.  I don’t have a problem if people want to marshal a logically structured well researched critique. The fact is that I have attempted to respond with comments that are as accessible as I can make them, in detail.  

Surely anyone reading through the body of my work on ASF can hardly claim I have not actively made every effort to help in a variety of areas, freely and in detail.  Now I find this isn’t even enough, they want my blood too, to discredit everything I do, and add abuse on top.

Is this a kind of Spanish inquisition? - must I recant my “heresy”, is that the idea?  If I believed what my chief detractors are saying, I would have to agree that black is white, day is night, the earth is flat, and Santa clause and the Easter bunny are real.  

So if I understand the conclusion the detractors and spoilers have made, my approach just doesn’t work, it is ineffective, it is not able to be applied consistently, and that I should abandon all my methods.  I also take it that it is not fine for me to post any of my “heresy” either, even if I do so to a select audience on the sidelines as I have, or I will continue to be harassed, abused and discredited without mercy, huh?

What nonsense.  I have been more than patient for the most part, I have contributed knowledge freely and without reward, only to yet again receive abuse for my efforts from people who don’t even bother to discuss constructively or even have a genuine interest in the pursuit of knowledge.  What do I gain from this?  Answer – Having my time wasted and my integrity attacked with specious nonsense and abuse laden PMs. (other than some good discussions with some notable people, and having made some friendships that I value.) 

People said forecasting couldn’t work for Elliott Wave for instance (tech was one of these for a long time before his recent back flip), and yet people like Prechter and Neely defied the odds and made significant and accurate calls, just look them up on the net and do some research. 

As my parting final comment, to the minority who actually think, consider this.  Have a look at the forecasts that have been posted as objectively as you can.  It is up to you to decide if it is all a fluke and put it down to sheer luck and a series of “black swan” events (an unusual statistical distribution like winning lotto), or that there is possibility a modicum of truth in what I have said.

That’s it, I intended to withdraw with a lower profile in March, and said I’d reduce my posts to select areas.  Even when I did this, I was hounded time after time by Tech (just look back through the history and you’ll see the pattern of incessant baiting), and I endured this not responding for months.  When I finally responded on this thread I’m characterised as the bad guy and instigator.  What crap.  Some may see this as a personal bout between tech and I, (chops characterised this point of view with his trademark humour) but this is not so.  This is a calculated vendetta by tech since wavepicker and I have intelligently questioned his uncritical promotion of his buddies and his system at the expense of balanced appraisals.

Time for me to focus on what matters, and this petty nonsense isn’t it.


----------



## yogi-in-oz (21 June 2007)

Magdoran said:


> I don’t know why this topic is being discussed.  It all started when questions were asked in the XAO Analysis thread about my recent forecasts I’d posted up.  Interestingly I had decided to truncate posting for a while in March, and had in fact intended to just keep up a small pulse on a few threads since I’d received some PMs requesting me to post up my thoughts every so often.
> 
> I had deliberately avoided having a direct confrontation with tech for a very long time (years on fact).  In reflection I could have been more dignified in my response in this thread I suppose, and for that I’m sorry that others saw an unpleasant outburst.  I just felt compelled to expose what was really going on, and call a spade a spade.
> 
> ...







Best post in this thread, so far ..... !~!

..... stick around Mag, you are needed here ..... 

happy days


   paul





=====


----------



## >Apocalypto< (21 June 2007)

Mag,

It's time for you to hit the ignore button and move on from this.

All that matters is what you see and know works if other square thinking members can't grasp your advanced system of price and time trading tell them to read some books and get back to you.

I for one am sick of the witch hunt directed at Mag. he is a true chartist and members in here should appreciate his unquie approach to the art of trading I idolize his methods and I am on the path way to his style of trading.

I belive in Gann and no Gann is not 100% right all the time but what is unless you have 100% perfect approach or system then who r u to attack Mag and call it constructive, as it is far from it.

Mag combines price and time with patterns he is not a time trader time gives him an idea of what to expect and when based on pattern volume and angle direction and points.

How he chooses to use time is his business have any of you ever made a time based call like he has!

Please come forward with proof if you have, Mag has made many!

This is not a thread to work mag and his trading style over it was ment to be about the XAO and time usage!

Some of u owe him an apology i think a few of you in here are nothing more then simple minded kids at times!

I can tell you now what Mag can do, blows most of you and me out of the water.

Mag see past this stupidity and keep it up. I would really hate to not have your excellent analysis on these forums.


----------



## reece55 (21 June 2007)

yogi-in-oz said:


> Best post in this thread, so far ..... !~!
> 
> ..... stick around Mag, you are needed here .....
> 
> ...



Couldn't agree more Yogi......

Mag, whilst Gann is completely outside of the way I trade markets, your posts are insightful and very interesting.

Personally, I think that getting a trader to think out of the square is the most important thing. We can all learn from one another, because inevitably our objective is to succeed, and we can do that together. As traders, we should assist one another - it's not a 100 m sprint where only one person can win - we can all win. The important part is to respect that inevitably we all have different ways of getting to the finish line and opening ones mind to alternative methods will only support your quest, not hinder it.

As always, hope to see more from you Mag, whenever you have the time or the inclination. And same goes for tech. Maybe just no more infighting between you 2, because I think I speak for most in saying we respect both your opinions and like hearing from both of you!

All the best trading 
Reece


----------



## tech/a (21 June 2007)

Its not Rocket Science.

Exponents calculate both time and price from significant highs and significant lows.

I am *yet to see *the inclusion of time in any analysis which demonstrates an edge.
Infact in itself it appears to be no better than any other indicator with around a 50/50 success rate (from what I've seen).

Thats no big deal you can make methods/analysis which is right 30% of the time profitable.

Appreciating the efforts put in.

Moggie.
Go have a look at the 100s of questions directed at me on the T/Trader Threads. If your presenting something expect questions.
I'm not taking a personal attack on yourself ---I could---Post after post of incessent whinning.

Choice is yours I aint going anywhere.


----------



## happytrader (21 June 2007)

Hi Magdoran

You obviously enjoy what you do and you do it very well. As for your posts they definitely have nerd appeal and add value to this forum.

Gann practitioners always get hammered here. Its a given. Just check out the now defunct 'Trading the Spi' thread from September 2005 till October last year if you want confirmation.

Anyway Mags, stick around and post away.

Cheers
Happytrader


----------



## wavepicker (21 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> Its not Rocket Science.
> 
> Exponents calculate both time and price from significant highs and significant lows.
> 
> ...





As Mag pointed out in an earlier post, the key is the PATTERN. The pattern of the trend, the pretty pictures the market is painting are the basis of how and when his time and price forecats are generated.

Time might be the more important than price on occasions. For example the edge could be that you know how much TIME to be in a trade before the trend might start becoming at risk, as such, as a key date is approached, one can also look at price levels and in particular price PATTERNS  as well on order to make decisions. 

As such, what Yogi is doing(just calculating key dates) does not even come close to the class of analysis that Mag is conducting. Does it give you an edge??  mag obviously think so, otherwise he would not be using it and swear by it. However the edge is not always the advantage. CONSISTENCY is the key, to be able to be pateient, wait for the setup, plan the trade(hopefully at a profit) and REPEAT is what counts.

Just my opinion


----------



## tech/a (21 June 2007)

Waves.

Have no problem with the introduction of Patterns into the mix.
Time obviously used in conjunction with patterns and price.
Miner is similar in his approach. So to Prechter.



> Given the examples I’ve put up, are these not evidence of the “effectiveness”, and if they are not, then what would constitute such “effectiveness”. Who is to define this? Who sets the standard? How do we guarantee that any standard is truly “objective”?



.

In all honesty NO.

(1) Don Waterfields outstanding contributions here and on Reecap,certainly are transparent.
(2) So to are Stevo's trading blogs.
(3) Radge has 4 current portfolio's available to his clients all in sound profit all totally transparent.
(4) Techtrader again transparent.

All measurable all clear all presented with a *CLEAR understanding of application.*
My opinion.

You know years ago *I went to a meeting where they were selling a $12,000 *trading methodology. At the end I stood up and asked.

"If I'm to invest my $12,000 can you furnish me with 12 mths preferably 2 yrs of Audited trading records which prove that you have achieved the return that you tell us we can achieve".

The response.
"This method probably wont suit you as you appear to be one who needs quantification of result---sorry we cannot be of help".

Much of the room of "Woodducks" grumbled at my question.
You know as I left of a room of 200 atleast 40 were signing up!!




> People said forecasting couldn’t work for Elliott Wave for instance (tech was one of these for a long time before his recent back flip), and yet people like Prechter and Neely defied the odds and made significant and accurate calls, just look them up on the net and do some research.




*Not so.*
Always had a respect for Elliott was the only type of "predictive" analysis I  
could/can see merit in. Only reciently revived my interest and used in in my discretionary trading.

Others of note
(1) Steidelmayer---commonly known as "Market Profile".
(2) Volume Spread analysis.(reciently re introduced and using in conjunction with analysis.).


Gann other than Swing Trading although I have spent time investigating has to me little practical inclusion in my trading.
People keep posting on the subject and when they do I'll ask the questions I never seem to get answered.

There has been *headway made *in this thread now as it seems that Pattern is the most important when using time as an analysis tool.
A common thread shared with Elliott.


----------



## wavepicker (21 June 2007)

tech/a said:


> There has been *headway made *in this thread now as it seems that Pattern is the most important when using time as an analysis tool.
> A common thread shared with Elliott.




When using this timing Tool(which is based on Mclarens interpretation of the WD Gann Time factor)-YES.
Mclaren has a whole 4 Hr DVD which delves into pattern, pattern of the trend (types of trends), EW, and price level determination.  This is a prerequisite for the second DVD set which deals with adding a Time Factor on the initial analysis.

If one masters the Jedi Arts( the application of this Time Factor) from Mclarens DVD, then after establishing whether an instrument is running a 90 Day, 144 Day or any other cycle, it can be determined if this stock or whatever you are looking at “Vibrates” in Time and Price throughout the square or Cycle you are considering. By vibrating I believe it is meant that it finds support and resistance in both price and time increments of the square or cycle. The increments are established by dividing the square (cycle) up into 1/8ths and 1/3rds from start to finish for BOTH the price and TIME axis. As such if it vibrates it is doing so within various “harmonic” levels within price and time.

If you are skilful enough to find a vibration within the instrument you are looking at, then this will extend into the future in both price and time. The question is for how long?  Other cycles can come into play the further you go into the future, I have found this out from my own studies into cycles.

Of more importance is where do you originate the square or cycle?? From a Mclaren seminar that I attended 4 years ago, he did this from important highs or lows, but there are no set rules.  

I have found that just because a price makes a high or low at a particular time that does not automatically mean that will be a cycle low. In fact that is not very often the case. Understanding the pattern and pattern of trend can actually assist in guiding the skilfull practioner in finding the correct origin of a cycle. Then it will be necessary to calibrate the X and Y axis of the chart such that 1 unit of price will be equal to one unit of time. I think Gann called this “squaring of the Chart”.


Adding other disciplines like EW into the mix can be very helpful here in that the “significance” of a particular point in time can be validated, and moves following price hitting key price and time increments can be quantified.



I am not a Gann practioner, but have attended some of Mclarens Gann workshops.

I am currently looking at another TIME tool that is completely different to this, and DOES NOT require, pattern to be considered into the analysis mix, but compliments EW very well.


----------



## wayneL (21 June 2007)

happytrader said:


> Hi Magdoran
> 
> You obviously enjoy what you do and you do it very well. As for your posts they definitely have nerd appeal and add value to this forum.
> 
> ...



Absolute rubbish and an entirely different situation.

Bronteman was hammered for hindsite trading and refusing to answer the simplest of questions. 

Magdoran, while retaining some information for himself (entirely his right), has given away stacks of information for anyone interested in following this line, including education sources and is pedaling nothing for his own benefit.

Bronteman on the other hand, was trawling for clients for his services and totally evasive when simple interested questions were asked about what the support and resistance levels were etc. He would not even say if they were sq of 9 levels or not.

Bronteman was also well known for using multiple accounts, (had *7* accounts nextdoor where he is now banned) and carrying on self-congratulatory, backslapping posts with himself.

Get real Happytrader!


----------



## Magdoran (21 June 2007)

Thanks for the kind words of support, I appreciate it.

Perhaps I should shed some light behind the scenes - this may explain my comments above - I will have minimal time for posting because a series of (very positive) events on the home front are now my highest priority.

A significant factor is that today I have successfully concluded an international agreement that will significantly change my life.  This is now my highest priority.

As for my trading style, I think that there is a significant distinction between formally presenting a finished system and offering it as a plug and play offering, as opposed to offering ideas for discussion in specific technical analysis and derivative areas. 

I have never said what I have custom built for myself will be everyone’s cup of tea.  I have not put my work on display as a show case offering, and never said that it is “the way”, or the “only way”, but have always advised people to seek what works for them, and have commented on what works for me.  What’s wrong with that?

Where I think a mistake is being made is about this concept of “robust” systems.  I keep saying that my work is based on Bill McLaren’s detailed work, and I draw primarily from this body of knowledge.  McLaren has been around for a lot longer than Radge has for example, and has a significant public record for many years, and is a regular on CNBC.  To claim that McLaren’s approach which is on the world stage is somehow inferior to a few minor entries on a (respectfully) provincial notice board is an interesting comparison.  Is there also a notion that these “trading blogs” are equivalent to premium offerings at the international level?  

As for trading performance, if you ask Bill for audited trading records displaying the results of his approach, (this is even covered in the DVDs), I’m sure these can be made available.  As wavepicker says, his entire approach is very detailed and comprehensive.  This is really what is being challenged here, and it is not my place to republish copyrighted material.

An example of how I think an exchange of ideas should have been conducted is in the “Improving Chart Analysis” thread where Lesm politely discussed points of analysis with me.  There is a chasm of difference between debating issues as I have done with notable accomplished traders like bunyip for example who argues logically and thinks about what you say, and the alternative where the central theme is to impose a warped and incorrect view and argue by assertion and put downs.

In essence I’m saying that I have no problem with constructive debates based on well thought out arguments that progress logically.  Repetition, regurgitation, and chanting slogans is not beneficial from my standpoint.  The use of pejorative labels (which I have been guilty of too in this case), is also not helpful.

Just because some of my approaches embrace one style or another is also not an excuse for bad behaviour or disrespect.  When I have raised questions in other areas, I have done so politely, asking questions in a constructive and respectful manner.  Just because the word “Gann” is involved is not a passport to allow uncritical thinking, posting falsehoods, and disrespectful interchanges.  I am not the first person to experience this, this is an ongoing pattern.   I just refuse to have anything more to do with this, and will not continue to lower myself to that level.

My primary motivation has been to interact and share ideas constructively, and to pique an interest in looking at a range of alternative points of view.  I just think the cost of enduring the ongoing negativity is unhealthy for me when I have more important pressing issues at hand.

Ironically, I *am *going _somewhere_… and I’m looking forward to it!


Kind Regards


Magdoran


----------



## tech/a (21 June 2007)

*Waves*



> The question is for how long?




Point (1)



> Of more importance is where do you originate the square or cycle??




Point (2) 



> but there are no set rules.




Point (3) 



> Then it will be necessary to calibrate the X and Y axis of the chart such that 1 unit of price will be equal to one unit of time.




Yes Understand.



> To claim that McLaren’s approach which is on the world stage is somehow inferior to a few minor entries on a (respectfully) provincial notice board is an interesting comparison.




Interesting---Ive never seen this claim. Infact Ive never seen a comparison with McLaren made on this board.



> Is there also a notion that these “trading blogs” are equivalent to premium offerings at the international level?




Is there? 



> Repetition, regurgitation, and chanting slogans is not beneficial from my standpoint.




Moggie you have proven to be the master in this art form!



> I am going somewhere… and I’m looking forward to it!




It appears time and perhaps price have combined and intersected for you.
All the best in your future,whatever that is and where ever that maybe.


----------



## doctorj (21 June 2007)

We are nearly 100 posts in and I think everyone has had plenty of opportunity to contribute everything they're likely to on this topic.  There is plenty of content here for everyone to read and reflect on should they so desire.

So, before this thread wanders off the rails, I think now is a very good opportunity to close the thread.  Thank you to all participants for maintaining a reasonable level of decorum.


----------

