Gann, honestly, is it a good basis for trading?

[It's Snake Pliskin]

What's the conventional tech analysis?

Tech you haven't answered my question. What is conventional tech analysis?

 

[gazelle]

ST read post 184 .

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Tech you haven't answered my question. What is conventional tech analysis?

Anyone? Should I ignore myself too?

 

[nunthewiser]

Anyone? Should I ignore myself too?

no idea m8 i use my own methods , dont care a hoot how anyone else trades to be honest

 

[tech/a]

Anyone? Should I ignore myself too?

Sorry I didnt see it initially not ignoring you.
How could I!

Conventional Analysis
Oscillators. Pretty well most of those which come with the standard software packages like Metastock.
The stuff most people clog up their charts with.
Yu know the ones all crap no price action.

 

[Sicilian Trader]

ST read post 184 .

murphy's law!

thanks Gazelle

 

[sails]

Hi Margaret,

Hope you are well. Interesting to read your perspective on this.

I tend to agree with your assessment on some of these courses. The experience you had in getting some benefit in projecting while finding it difficult to actually trade from effectively seems a common complaint. I suspect part of the problem is that students of these courses are only given pieces of the puzzle and minimal help integrating the ideas into a usable coherent approach.

As for the link above, respectfully I met this guy, and I really don't think he knows much (nice guy, but a practitioner???). He certainly didn't seem to have much to say when he was promoting the Kuppe lecture which I thought was a monumental waste of time. Put it this way, this approach wouldn't be something I'd recommend (for what my opinion's worth).

Again, I'd say McLaren's work is the exception. There are also people out there prepared to help others to get their heads around these concepts. I found getting a trading group together of people keen on sharing ideas worked very well. (By the way, Bunyip mentioned he didn't have an affiliation with McLaren, and either do I for the record, just so that's clear.)

This idea of "pressure points" I suspect is a SITM creation. I agree with the criticism laid out that many of these don't really amount to much when viewed in a one dimensional uninformed way. Some dates are relevant and other's aren't. That's because they are being viewed in isolation without reference to the pattern of trend. In my view working without the critical pieces of the puzzle is like trying to fly a plane with key components missing (like the engine for example).

Time cycle analysis works very differently. Yes the concept of division of the range (price) works in fractions (eights and thirds) like many people use this kind of extension/retracement tool. Time while having similarities to the price range is more complex because you're adding a whole dimension/paradigm of thinking into the mix because it involves both the relationship to price and to pattern (at least the way I do it). What does this mean? It means you need to be able to perceive markets in a multi dimensional way - I look at the pattern first, then time, then price in that order (although this is not necessarily always the case, there are some situations where price can be of primary interest). McLaren's time factor work I found was a good starting point.

Note that there can be multiple cycles running concurrently (this makes things messy sometimes if you don't understand and recognize this). Also, the pattern of trend tells you a lot about what is going on. Also you need to look in multiple time frames (daily charts, weekly, monthly) to understand the different trends active at the same time - a move in one time frame (e.g. Daily) is the dominant trend, while in another (e.g. Monthly) it is a counter trend. This is critical in my view. Also wave theory can be very helpful here too.

There can also be harmonic cycles running concurrently in the same time frame (daily/weekly/monthly). This can also become confusing if you aren't aware of it. If you perceive these, then the whole process of determining probabilities and trades becomes much simpler.

Also, just because you hit a key date in a cycle you have identified does not mean that trend is over and a reversal will occur (and you can be wrong when you do this on several fronts - which cycle, determination of where it is in the cycle, placement of key points in the cycle, missing other cycles running concurrently, different cycles in other time frames, and this is off the top of my head, there are many more).

When you hit a key time and price (if you're projection is valid enough you hit these), you can get extensions to a cycle or a retracement for a specific increment (like the division of the range in price into eights and thirds, same for a time period, but it is not that simple - there are multiple inputs to determine when and how to do this). Also, sometimes the market trends to the cent or date, but sometimes it can be out by a margin - this is common, and there are reasons for this.

How markets trade into "key dates" (assuming your analysis is valid) tells you a lot about the trend. What we're trying to do is to constantly assess the risk to our trade, and determine when the trend is at risk. This is so we know when to take partial profits to ensure winning trades don't become losing trades. How you take profits can vary widely. Me, I have a range of alternatives. Full exit, partial exit (e.g. half, one third for less risky trades, two thirds for more risky trades), or hedging (diagonal ratio back spread, direct sale in a different strike but same expiry, mix of futures and options in multiple time frames and ratios etc).

So once you've hit a time/price point, this is a point to assess what to do. Some are where key reversals occur, some are continuation points, some result in brief counter trends. Some are minor in the cycle you are looking at, others are major. But it is the pattern of trend that is critical. This must be viewed in the context of the pattern and the aggregate of all the cycles that are active in multiple time frames, and any harmonic cycles that are active. This is multi-dimensional unlike other approaches, hence it must be contextual. This is where most people flounder. In my view trying to use this kind of approach without understanding this is like flying blind.

Hope this helps

Mag

Hi Magdoran,

Yes, keeping well, thanks. Trust you are well on your way to recovery.

Thanks for the in depth reply - and I do agree with your views. I haven't seen or spoken with David for quite a while now, nor have I heard him actually speak on the subject of Gann, so your assessment may very well be right. And I did explain in a later post (I think to Bunyip), that McLaren's DVDs would actually be the first choice for more education on the subject of time. I have thoroughly enjoyed McLaren's ebook and really like the fact there is so little waffle and he gets straight to the nuts and bolts.

Probably, what prompted my post about looking further into David's course is that I have always wanted to understand how to use the square of nine. Recently, someone was asking about historical, intraday SPI data and I remembered Adest used to have it. I then noticed the subject list for David's Gann course which included so many of the areas I missed out on. A few years ago, we paid $500 for me to go to a half day seminar and the main reason was that the Square of Nine was advertised as one of the subjects for the day - plus all the hype on how good it is. However, all of about 10 mins was spent on it right at the end of the session - with the statement that it would be taught more fully at the next (expensive) module.

I also agree with your analogy of only being given a few pieces of a puzzle with minimal help to try and put those otherwise obscure pieces together. And thanks for sharing how you put some of those loose ends together.

Cheers

 

[tech/a]

Here you go Sails.

All about Ganns square of nine.
http://www.tradingfives.com/store/so9book.html


Even better than using a pencil and ruler here is a calculator.

My $6,000 bill is in the mail.


http://www.xmlworks.com/gann/javascript/

 

[sails]

Here you go Sails.

All about Ganns square of nine.
http://www.tradingfives.com/store/so9book.html


Even better than using a pencil and ruler here is a calculator.

My $6,000 bill is in the mail.


http://www.xmlworks.com/gann/javascript/

Thanks for the links Tech - although think I've paid my dues for Gann courses - always seem to get short changed...

Actually, a simple google search has a bit of info on it as well. Found this article by Jason Sidney - he was on the staff of SITM a few years ago before it was bought out by Hubb. http://www.marketinsight.com.au/articles/article.php?name=Ganns_Square_of_Nine

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Sorry I didnt see it initially not ignoring you.
How could I!

Conventional Analysis
Oscillators. Pretty well most of those which come with the standard software packages like Metastock.
The stuff most people clog up their charts with.
Yu know the ones all crap no price action.

Ah Tech, I thought you had taken my question the wrong way, thanks for your response. Tradeguider has some of those conventional indicators too. As you know any indicator will be of value as long as price itself is taken into account.

Cheers..

 

[tech/a]

Ah Tech, I thought you had taken my question the wrong way, thanks for your response. Tradeguider has some of those conventional indicators too. As you know any indicator will be of value as long as price itself is taken into account.

Cheers..

Snake.
Your presuming I'm using tradeguider in a conventional manner.

I will add that I have used "Canned" indicators in systems testing but very rarely. T/T has one an EMA.

But for discretionary trading not a one.

 

[motorway]

Snake.
Your presuming I'm using tradeguider in a conventional manner.

I will add that I have used "Canned" indicators in systems testing but very rarely. T/T has one an EMA.

But for discretionary trading not a one.

EW is an indicator
There has to be Five waves etc

Harriman would today use his money
to create five wave corrective patterns
and three wave impulsive

That is how he made it...
Taking advantage of all such indicators
even if he did not know them

He would still use the liquidity they generated

Harriman was one of the original models for smart money
( $700,000,000 mil per year in 1907 )

eg
It was he that said what you could not sell at $150 ( stock selling at $150)
you could sell if you put it up to $180 first and then sell as much as you want all the way back down to a $150

motorway

 

[motorway]

Thanks for the links Tech - although think I've paid my dues for Gann courses - always seem to get short changed...

Actually, a simple google search has a bit of info on it as well. Found this article by Jason Sidney - he was on the staff of SITM a few years ago before it was bought out by Hubb. http://www.marketinsight.com.au/articles/article.php?name=Ganns_Square_of_Nine

It is just away of drawing a square root scaled trend line
on a linear scaled chart..

Think of a stock that moves from .01 to $500

on a linear scale chart you could not draw straight trend lines

so you could use a log chart...

But say the 50% level was very important to you and you wanted the geometry of the chart to line up --> 50% = halfway point.

You could draw a log scaled trend line and overlay it on the linear chart

This is what Gann was doing but overlaying a square root scaled trendline

...

Go back to the log example
You know where the straight scaled trendline will be broken

even though you are working off a linear chart

NOW will it be support

ONLY if someone wants it to be


motorway

 

[tech/a]

EW is an indicator
There has to be Five waves etc

Harriman would today use his money
to create five wave corrective patterns
and three wave impulsive

That is how he made it...
Taking advantage of all such indicators
even if he did not know them

He would still use the liquidity they generated

Harriman was one of the original models for smart money
( $700,000,000 mil per year in 1907 )

eg
It was he that said what you could not sell at $150 ( stock selling at $150)
you could sell if you put it up to $180 first and then sell as much as you want all the way back down to a $150

motorway

Dont disagree.
Anything that we use AS an indicator could be classified as one.

But my comment was to common indicators and Id hardly call E/W and P&F (As a second example,not that I use it) common.

 

[motorway]

Dont disagree.
Anything that we use AS an indicator could be classified as one.

But my comment was to common indicators and Id hardly call E/W and P&F (As a second example,not that I use it) common.

Point taken

much good in EW too

eg Impulsive and corrective

And it is how you use them too
eg P&F is a method of charting first
you can do EW on P&F charts

There was one site that did EW analysis on P&F FX charts

motorway

 

[Magdoran]

Hi Magdoran,

Yes, keeping well, thanks. Trust you are well on your way to recovery.

Thanks for the in depth reply - and I do agree with your views. I haven't seen or spoken with David for quite a while now, nor have I heard him actually speak on the subject of Gann, so your assessment may very well be right. And I did explain in a later post (I think to Bunyip), that McLaren's DVDs would actually be the first choice for more education on the subject of time. I have thoroughly enjoyed McLaren's ebook and really like the fact there is so little waffle and he gets straight to the nuts and bolts.

Probably, what prompted my post about looking further into David's course is that I have always wanted to understand how to use the square of nine. Recently, someone was asking about historical, intraday SPI data and I remembered Adest used to have it. I then noticed the subject list for David's Gann course which included so many of the areas I missed out on. A few years ago, we paid $500 for me to go to a half day seminar and the main reason was that the Square of Nine was advertised as one of the subjects for the day - plus all the hype on how good it is. However, all of about 10 mins was spent on it right at the end of the session - with the statement that it would be taught more fully at the next (expensive) module.

I also agree with your analogy of only being given a few pieces of a puzzle with minimal help to try and put those otherwise obscure pieces together. And thanks for sharing how you put some of those loose ends together.

Cheers

Hi Margaret,

I did see your comment about ADEST. I think David did a good job though of finding a range of speakers and offering a diversity of viewpoints for those that were interested.

On the square of nine, McLaren spent over a decade trying to make it work, and in the end discarded it. I agree with this assessment. It is an amusing toy, but I think there are much better approaches that require significantly less effort and yield significantly better results - but that's just my opinion.

I know Cameron Mitchell was hawking a kind of Gann angles moving average square of nine approach a friend of mine looked at. Personally I wasn't impressed. I think he misses the bulk of what McLaren is on about, and focuses on things I tend to think are missing the bulk of the advanced thinking in the geometric/time cycles schools.

Anything with a moving average involved usually signals to me that the person using it just doesn't get the approaches I've focused on, with the exception of wavepicker who uses this kind of thing in a unique fusion with a kind of wave and cycle theory which he explains in part in his posts.

So, if you want to play with the square of nine, be aware that many have tried this with limited success. However, you may have better success with it than I or McLaren.

However, I think you would find McLaren's thinking on the "Time Factor" and time cycles very interesting. It may fill in some of the blank spots you are missing. Also, time angles once you grasp them can be very powerful. I suspect most of the people commenting on this thread have no idea of what these are, let alone how to use them. Unfortunately this usually is something that requires mastering several prerequisites first in order to perceive these.

Kind Regards

Mag

 

[Magdoran]

The difference between following something dynamically
or statically....

Through time frames dynamically or in a time frame statically..

There is only one high on the chart and one low
in relation to other highs and lows
There is not a daily weekly or monthly high or low

If your string the course of sales out keeping the structure of the spacing (dynamic time ) There is only a series of events happening in different moments..

You can zoom in or out but only by keeping the dynamic time structure
The same spacing proportions.. Can you keep proportion.

The course of sales is not spaced out in clock time periods

The analogy with driving the car is correct in a sense

They move the same in that
both are dynamic , they change speed
sometimes they stop , sometimes they travel fast

you can only predict if you know what the dynamic time will be
in the future...

You can only predict where the car will be if you know how fast it will be travelling , tomorrow ..

But you only know how fast it is travelling now and how fast it has been travelling...

Unlike the clock you can not predict in the same way with dynamic time

I know what time will be on the clock a 100 years from now
But that is the beguiling nature of static time..



motorway

Hi Motorway,

I must admit, I am never sure quite how to interpret your posts. You do seem to be a thinker and have made some really interesting comments from a unique perspective (the "motor-way" hehe). But on the whole I just don't grasp the ideas underpinning your thinking which you don't seem to venture openly.

I still would like you to elucidate what you mean/define as "static" as opposed to "dynamic". Some examples may help. Currently I suspect you are not perceiving what I am. I'm certainly confused about what you're seeing. I'm curious to find out a little more about your perspective.

I do think that we are dealing with completely different paradigms. I honestly don't get yours currently. I would like to, and I respect that it may be difficult for you to express this in a way that is easy to grasp. Perhaps if you pointed me to the foundations of your thinking and gave some directions to make it easier to join the dot's, that would be constructive.

On the topic of the car and acceleration, I posted some discussions on Einstein's theory of relativity and on Heisenberg's uncertainly principle. I think these have a bearing on how markets trend (not a proof, but an interesting perspective to consider). For instance consider the idea of mesons and how this relates to uncertainty - one point known, another apparently "random". I think this kind of micro tipping field is in part a way the market trades chaotically.

Further, an analogy I would use would be the actual path the moon takes considering it is rotating while orbiting the earth, while the earth orbits the sun. This is like the different time frames, this is not to separate these as unrelated perspectives, but to put a trend in perspective. In EW theory smaller degree wave patterns build into larger degree wave patterns. Corrective being ABC (3 wave) patterns, impulse being 5 wave patterns (although wavepicker goes into the subtleties of this - and things like ending diagonals etc).

Hence this is a dynamic model in the true sense of the word, which is what confuses me about your specific usage of the term to mean something completely different. I think we are using terms to mean different things. I have some very specific observations in mind as do you. The problem is that you need to define precisely what you mean to make sense to me.

I am guessing at the point you are trying to make. I have tried to illustrate what I'm seeing in past posts. Can you please point me to some posts of yours where you describe what you are seeing? Have you posted any non-hindsight trades or projections? Until I see your work in action I am unclear as to what exactly it is that you are trying to get at.

Also, if you are basing your perspective (dynamic vs static) on Frank's work, then there is no need to respond, I perceive his approach as not something I would like to pursue - It's just not "my cup of tea". His perspective of "time" is very different to mine, almost antithetical.

Anyway, I'd love to see a post with some detail and rigor in it if you wouldn't mind please.

Kind Regards

Magdoran

 

[Magdoran]

I think you do understand
When you zoom out you are still only looking at the present moment

You are not looking into the future

yes we can zoom out and look back in time and see the past price behaviour
and see what lies from that point up ahead till the prsent moment

yes we can see the past and the present

But we can not see tomorrow

You are looking back to the car from the congestion that exists in the present.
here is where your use of the anaolgy fails , All these cars exist in the one dynamic moment in the present,,

There are no coarse of sales that exist now that are up ahead that we can see in the present moment..

What you are saying is that ( the car congestion )

You look at what is on the chart now and take postions several weeks back in the past


motorway

motorway,

How does what you are doing differ exactly? Are you saying you can see the immutable future? Are you arguing a predetermination case? If so I ardently disagree. I think the future is not yet written (which is pretty much antithetical in many Gann circles, and means I have a very radical view on the whole philosophical debates over this, but I still haven't solved all the contradictions yet, and suspect I never will).

I see each moment as unique, and every input potentially a game changing action. This is especially true when there are tipping points based on flaws in the infrastructure which effects the "superstructure" (E.g. Soros' discussion of dynamic disequilibrium and reflexivity regarding the breakdown of the Soviet Union - see "The Alchemy of Finance" for a full commentary on this, and on his references to the works of Karl Popper).

I see cycles, I see order, and I see chaotic behaviour in the market. There are many variables playing out at any given time, and the minor tipping points can lead to major ones. Soros believes that if you are looking in the right way that you can perceive the flaws in people's thinking on mass, and in part from observing structures and their weaknesses (look at his shorting of the UK currency against the German Mark seeing the duality of the German bank's role and exploiting this).

I'm suggesting that using a combination of perspectives in concert allows you to see patterns which give a significant edge to perceiving how the market may unfold in the future. The Key concept is deliberately looking for times where a "black Swan" event (ala Taleb) is likely enough to constitute a consistent edge, knowing how to use the right instruments in the right markets with the ability to engage ones imagination and channel it into the future to perceive when and how these black swan events may unfold, and taking the action to take advantage of this.

This is hardly a static approach or perspective, and respectfully time is NOT static in this case, or the analysis either for that matter. It is precisely DYNAMIC in the dictionary definition of the word. Hence, I am confused by your comments. I don't think your perspective embraces mine at all from what I can see. I think we are talking from completely alien paradigms. Please elucidate if you think this is incorrect.

Does that make sense?

Mag

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Snake.
Your presuming I'm using tradeguider in a conventional manner.

I will add that I have used "Canned" indicators in systems testing but very rarely. T/T has one an EMA.

But for discretionary trading not a one.

Tech,
Not at all I was just commenting that not only Metastock but TG has the conventional indicators. I know you don't use them through your comments.

 

[motorway]

motorway,

I think the future is not yet written (which is pretty much antithetical in many Gann circles, and means I have a very radical view on the whole philosophical debates over this, but I still haven't solved all the contradictions yet, and suspect I never will).

I see each moment as unique, and every input potentially a game changing action.

I'm suggesting that using a combination of perspectives in concert allows you to see patterns which give a significant edge to perceiving how the market may unfold in the future. The Key concept is deliberately looking for times where a "black Swan" event (ala Taleb) is likely enough to constitute a consistent edge, knowing how to use the right instruments in the right markets with the ability to engage ones imagination and channel it into the future to perceive when and how these black swan events may unfold, and taking the action to take advantage of this.

This is hardly a static approach or perspective, and respectfully time is NOT static in this case, or the analysis either for that matter. It is precisely DYNAMIC in the dictionary definition of the word. Hence, I am confused by your comments. I don't think your perspective embraces mine at all from what I can see. I think we are talking from completely alien paradigms. Please elucidate if you think this is incorrect.

Does that make sense?

Mag

Yes , I understand you ..... It is not Gann as I have seen it usually applied

No doubt Gann himself discarded much along the way and would have kept doing so....

Taleb Soros Popper...... Yes I see

I appreciate Taleb esp

he talks about the three body problem
and how much we can not predict
But that does not mean that configurations occur
where what I call high probability forced moves unfold..

eg If all the balls are far apart or close together

If a market is extended and churning , dull or active etc

On P&F I have read that GANN did not use them much
But Then I have read that after he died they found P&F charts that large that you could cover walls with them

as regards angles on P&F

when you change the box size you are changing the scale of both axis
The reversal is a filter of time as much as price

Because volatility scales with time

When you change the reversal, You are altering the trend constant ( degrees )
of the 45 degree line ( You still draw it at 45 on the particular chart )

Seeing the reversal is a time filter ... The chart has a dynamic time scale

The first TA method that made sense to me was P&F

I used to draw full coarse of scale charts by hand

only one box reversal... I knew them as fluid flow charts ( not as three box reversal chart craft trading method )

And this is key point

It is a charting method that you can apply any type of trading system to.

So Techs point and the difference


I can do EW on a Point and figure chart
But I can not uses EW on a bar chart to do P&F

EW is an indicator
P&F is a charting method



motorway