This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

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

Jump to new
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
Click to expand...

Hmm

I can do E/W on both a Bar chart and a P&F chart.
Yes See your point.Just as Candlesticks are a charting method as is Equivolume renko Market profile---blah.

Still E/W isnt to me a conventional indicator which was my point. I dont trade without indicators--.
 
gazelle said:
CBAKM7 PUT . looking for a high today otherwise no trade .
Click to expand...

Gazelle, how did it go - did you get your puts? CBA made a high yesterday on the 23rd (target date) at 3699 and at 3697 today. Or is it something else you were looking for?

I have read your posts with interest - thanks for sharing. I am interested in how you have arrived at your Gann analysis and how that is actually traded - thanks.
 

LOL, I will take your word on the square of nine, Magdoran. If McLaren only found it an amusing toy after a decade, it's obviously not what it is hyped up to be. I'm convinced now it's not worth chasing after anymore - thanks

And McLaren's DVD on time is one I an planning to purchase. At the moment, I am playing around with SPI futures as options trading in Oz very discouraging. The strategies I would like to do are just way too heavy on fees and slippage. Haven't given up on it completely, just being very selective. Bought Frank D's ebook this week, so my head is swimming with all sorts of different levels! Interesting concepts though and especially interesting to see how he adapts to changing market conditions that don't always fit into his initial forecast.

Magdoran, what sort of prerequisites do you feel are required to master the time angles?
 
Hello Margaret,

If you're aiming to understand the time factor material, I would strongly recommend you get and master the foundations first. Grasping this is critical and will save a significant amount of time and frustration. If you don't understand patterns of trend, the time cycles will not make sense. You just wont see it.

The time cycles material is great, but is so dependent on recognizing patterns that without this it probably will be more trouble than it's worth. The foundations takes a while to fully digest since McLaren makes so many really inspirational observations while he's presenting. Some of these I spent weeks on going through charts looking at what he was saying. Some of these weren't obvious at first either, and then the penny dropped. Then, WOW! A lot of things made sense, but this is usually gradual as you develop your thinking.

I'd suggest allowing yourself a good 6 months to absorb the material, and find yourself a good range of market data ranging back as far as you can. he does supply some examples, but looking at the real thing and going through past events can be eye opening. Especially if you have a capacity to wind the charts back and leave the right side blank as you scroll through each daily bar. Very revealing.

Prerequisites... Hmmm, well giving up the bad habit of using moving averages and oscillators for a start for most people (and perhaps forgetting 90% of the SITM stuff too - especially the swing chart stuff). (hehe - I think I just heard a big "hrumph noise go up in ASF haha!).

I'd say your dedication and perseverance will help a lot. This stuff is hard, but really rewarding if you can grasp it and develop. I think imagination and the capacity to visualise is important. If you could get the SITM stuff to work a bit, this is a good sign. Perhaps with the "mother load" (core information) you need available, you'll be able to put it all together. Your detailed knowledge of options / derivatives will be an advantage too.

Happy to help how I can, but I'd suggest the foundations DVD will work really well if you liked the e-book, then the time factor once you've absorbed the foundations, then some idea sharing and group collaboration may help too. You'll probably progress really quickly since you've been at this for a while, and probably have already developed a really good eye for charts. If nothing else the materials should reinforce the "good stuff" you've already acquired.

McLaren shows how the time angles work in the Time Factor DVD, but to really see these and use them yourself sort of pops into your head after mastering all the different aspects I've outlined. If you get most of this, I can point you in the right direction when you're ready.

Hope that helps!

Mag
 

I pretty much gave up on moving averages a long time ago - sometimes use MACD for divergences though. But, I do like my swing charts, especially the bigger charts often show some interesting range equalities - so it would take some convincing to let them go. Mind you, mine are just sketched out on plain paper with pencil, so nothing elaborate.


While I really appreciate the offer of help, I don't feel the time is ready just yet - there is still a heavy work load on the home front at times. Although it has improved a little, the difficulties seem to fluctuate in intensity. It is one of the reasons I am interested in futures trading as it is something where I can take a day off and not worry about open positions needing possible attention.

Thanks again and will let you know when I feel I can give something like this the time and focus it deserves. I see McLaren is now charging around $1000 for the two DVDs - but then that's cheaper than Tech's $6000

Cheers
 
Hello Margaret,

Whenever you want to bounce some ideas around, the door is always open. I bet you could teach me a thing or two too - especially some of your derivative work.

Is tech charging? $6,000 you say? Well, well, well. That puts a different perspective on things doesn't it? I'll hold my tongue until I can verify this. We are talking about Tech/A right?

Mag
 
Magdoran said:
Hello Margaret,

Whenever you want to bounce some ideas around, the door is always open. I bet you could teach me a thing or two too - especially some of your derivative work.
Click to expand...

I have put an enormous amount of work into options and their various strategies. It's a shame one has to be so restricted in the Oz market - but that's the way it is. Have to move on for now and improve directional skills. My first goal is to get my head around some of Frank's strategies. I am finding some of his levels actually fit in nicely with other TA (including swing charts, LOL) that I have learned. Will see how it goes. Following that, it will be McLaren and will certainly be grateful to bounce ideas.

I think you already have a better knowledge than most when it comes to options, however, if there is anything I can pass on, only too happy to do so.

Is tech charging? $6,000 you say? Well, well, well. That puts a different perspective on things doesn't it? I'll hold my tongue until I can verify this. We are talking about Tech/A right?
Click to expand...

Thanks Timmy - saved me going back to find the post. Mag, coming from someone as generous as Tech, it was absolutely taken in humour and my post was definitely tongue in cheek
 
tech/a said:
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/
Click to expand...

Above is post #208, and for the record, Tech was definitely NOT selling anything and no bill in the mail.

The links Tech posted looks interesting, however, the usefulness of the sq of 9 looks doubtful, so I will put it on the back burner - at least for now.
 
Hello Margaret,

Yes you have put a lot of work into derivatives. Actually I think in some areas you'd be way ahead of me. I'm very reliant on my software to "paint" the risk and reward picture, with a preference for Binomial over Black and Scholes.

But my mathematical ability without this crutch is poor. I cannot crunch that type of number in my head, although I do have a good feel for what the graph should look like, and what the numbers should be, but this is intuitive. A guy I knew at university was able to do calculus in his head. Amazing guy, talked about reverse demand curves, and all sorts of things even the lecturer was out of his depth. I can't do that, so I rely on the software to do it for me.

I think my strength is in the visualisation of the probability and integrating this with the "facts and figures" risk to reward on the chart, knowing where the "sweet spots" are. I think you clearly know the mathematical backdrop better than I do innately. You've shown this many times.

I sometimes get help building these from time to time when I reach my limits. I do the due diligence because I have to, not because I'm naturally good at it. I'm not. Believe me, I struggle sometimes. Logic is my strength. Crunching numbers isn't. I see the pattern, but I can't formularise it without aid (such as software).

Re McLaren's interpretation of Gann, I think you'd actually master this on your own once you have access to the pieces you need. You certainly have the capability. All I'd be doing would be to give you a few shortcuts and and accelerating the process to incorporate some of the pieces you are missing (a bit like Heisenberg made a minor but ultimately deal breaking error working on nuclear physics during WWII which meant the Nazis didn't develop nuclear capability).

Re Franks work. I've looked at this, and frankly (forgive the pun) I don't "buy" it. I think this whole use of the term "dynamic time" is a misnomer. Yes, it's a "dynamic system" since you adjust your appraisal as the market trends, but any system worth it's salt does this. It is a reactive approach, not a forecasting approach. I really don't think he gets "time" at all. His work indicates to me he has totally missed the points wavepicker and I made on this subject.

At several points in the past Frank would be taking the opposite trade when I'd have been winding out positions, or even reversing them. Key examples can be seen reading the comments between Frank and wavepicker, and especially the example of the Feb 24 2007 counter trend. Frank was still long when this sharp pull back occurred. If he really understood counter trends and "time", why doesn't his system deliver responses to address what to me are obvious situations where the trend is at risk? My conclusion is that he just doesn't understand time cycles the way we do. I think there is sufficient evidence from my perspective to support that conclusion for the present time.

That's not to say that there isn't value in his approach - there is if this is your preferred style. He has obviously spent a significant amount of time perfecting what he's doing. What I object to is his "mantra" that his system uses "dynamic time" and my approach is using "static time". This is just nonsense to me and marketing semantics, and in my view misleading.

If he understood time and the pattern of trend he'd be able to perceive when the trend is clearly at risk (from the "McLaren" perspective), which from the evidence he doesn't. So to label something he clearly doesn't understand with a pejorative term begs the question in my view.

I'd be fine with him calling his system "dynamic adjustment to price action", because that is what he's doing. It is based on price highs and lows, NOT time (at least in the sense I am talking about). In McLaren's terms he's using the "division of the range" in PRICE as a basis for his levels. Price is usually the third thing I look at in my approach, not the first.

Motorway talked of "the" high, or "the" low, which is in my view a trap if you try to impose this on time cycles in my style. Time cycles are often NOT based on key lows/highs in a significant number of cases. Of course they are important, but they are only a piece of the puzzle in my view. They become in my view a trap if you fixate too much on them. But this is MY view for me and my "style" I fully recognize that Frank and motorway have their own styles which works for them, and I salute that.

Regards

Mag
 
More rhetoric and posturing.
Still no trading examples.

For a method which is touted as the "Ducks Guts"
Seems impossible to trade.

Anyone AT ALL willing to demonstrate say 6 or so trades clearly showing Entry and then perhaps a description of trade management right through to Exit or stop out. (Long or Short,Derivative,Equity or Commodity)

I'm happy even if the mega secret analysis isnt discussed simply a buy here do this then exit here from an exponent would demonstrate its practical value.

Always good to see a method in application.

Thanks in advance.(Again)
 
tech/a said:
More rhetoric and posturing.
Still no trading examples.
Click to expand...

Whats that saying Tech?
Something about the cost of talk?

Seems a very familiar tact, lots of talk not a lot of walk. Complexity is camouflage. Just what is being hidden? the golden goose or a landmine :grenade:
 
There is always a lot of talk about fractals and chaos and even Heisenberg

But if it does not tie to practical application ?

So other names mentioned in this thread

Mandelbrot , Taleb... Ok

practical application is most apparent in another Richard Olsen ( FX Olsen )

Dynamic Time = Emotional Time


Frank's use of range Bars and Motorway's use of P&F are NOT part of this most ( Techs point is wrong again some charts only look different-- Some are )


With Volume Analysis It is the Volume that is the point of interest not the time periods --- Volume Analysis can be Dynamic Time too


Any real method that is using dynamic time..
will define time in this way

Time that stops starts expands contracts

Olsen has been closely associated to Mandelbrot
and Taleb to Mandelbrot also


My interest In The "New Science" is that it is old tape reading and P&F application

Wyckoff for example would agree with all of Olsen's statement above ,imo.

As to Why ... Such dynamic time converges to the structure at tick level where there is only one high and low

If we zoom out from the tape with static time

we lose reality


The new approach is also a very old approach

But not Gann ( What defines Gann-- using a clock to predict the time )

motorway
 
From Frank's free material


Ok remember these quotes
from the P&F thread

compare

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=383646&postcount=64

&
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=386424&postcount=65

Everything that works
Will work better on a chart with a dynamic time scale..

Everything

All the research I have seen supports this..

I can supply more such research..

It Is about what causes lag=The wrong use of time

motorway
 
Trembling Hand said:
Whats that saying Tech?
Something about the cost of talk?

Seems a very familiar tact, lots of talk not a lot of walk. Complexity is camouflage. Just what is being hidden? the golden goose or a landmine :grenade:
Click to expand...
Trembling Hand,

What of any value have you really contributed I'd like to ask?

Have you actually bothered to look at any of my examples? I posted quite a few and gave references to these in detail time after time for nearly a decade now - or is it too difficult for you to use the search function - do I have to spoon feed you as well?

How exactly is this avoiding giving practical examples? Wavepicker and I put together a whole raft of valuable information. We posted in advance trades time after time demonstrating and commenting on the analysis including posting charts and making in advance calls.

We sited reference materials, what to look at, and where to get it. What more do you want - do you need a babysitter? Why is this somehow my obligation to you TH? It's all there if you'd care to take the time to read it and actually flex that muscle between your ears. I even posted references to these on this thread. How hard is it to click on a link?

Did you look at the posts on derivatives too? I've done this for years as well, or haven't you taken the time to study this either? Respectfully, if we add your valuable contributions to mine, and I bet you won't find the knowledge quotient increases.

It's easy to be lazy and make hollow accusations with snide remarks. What you lack my friend is substance. It must be quite something to be tech's parrot.
 

Maybe the guys are talking about Gazelle who seems to have disappeared. Was hoping he would follow up on his CBA trade as per my post above...

Also, I think Gann analysis is a very broad term these days as there seem to be so many variations that lay claim to Gann or at least have some Gann in their systems.
 

Magdoran you will not bully me out of this thread like you do to others that question you. My initial post in here that sparked this thread back to life was about the theorist calming the greatness of Gann.

My challenge to them at the time was to show practical evidence of the claimed greatness of Gann. Not one including you have shown it. I don't want you to point out your great calls. Any self proclaimed internet Guru can do that. As a real trader I can point out a few good ones of my own. But I know they don't make the "Trembling hand practical theory" valid. What does is showing a methods application IN the market making money. I 've done that with approx 2000s real trades backed up with statements.

My backing up of Tech was in response to you paying out on his tech trader. I think thats a ridiculus reply. Here is a system that was REALLY traded LIVE, that MADE lots of money and put out there for ALL to scrutinse. And you tried to dumb on it. Whats the point you are trying to make

Funny you mention Wavepicker because I find your reply the same as wavepickers reply when I first came on here. He dumped on a method I put up for some reason and tried to push it off. Then I find out later that he was confessing to trading greatness when his claimed yearly profit was what I make in a couple of weeks . THEN I find his been kicked off here because he been posting under other handles praising his own post .

Internet gurus are a dime a dozen in this place. Their words are spread out like a sickness on this boards, like the one I replied to. I do not confess to knowing every thing about trading but I do know that I haven't seen an ACTUAL profitable Gann trader SHOW their profitable trading.

Thus my comment,
Seems a very familiar tact, lots of talk not a lot of walk. Complexity is camouflage.
Click to expand...
 

And you probably wont' . My interest in Gann was purely for his way of looking at things in his own time. In my view how we got here is of benefit overall. In saying that of course there are many hundreds of others who have made enormous contributions.

Today I like the ways of Darryl Morely and Nick Radge, not connected to either but their matter of fact straight up the line approach works for basic trading.

Sorry still have not got that book out T/H, but will comment a bit more when I do. And I am not going soft either, Gann made some very good contributions IMHO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Basic chart analysis/chart reading 101 for beginners
Replies
10
Views
4K
Gunnerguy
G
Ryan's Trading Journal (F/A+T/A Strategy)
6 7 8
Replies
141
Views
34K
aus_trader
Trading with Price, Pattern and Time
Replies
0
Views
5K
Triathlete
What Makes You A Successful Trader
Replies
3
Views
4K
OmegaTrader
O
S
Sydney share trading course?
Replies
5
Views
8K
Nortorious
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...