EW = Elliott Wave So9 = Square of Nine As for cutoff points, by definition there must be a cutoff because one tick does not a pattern make. But in practical terms it is below the smallest timeframe that most deal with (e.g., 5 minute). Not worth worrying about, imo, as there are many more important factors at play.
Being skeptical about something is fine but requires a shot at an objective basis to get it out of the "I had a dream" state. One normally grounds such conclusions on mucho experience or statistics. Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "brian_z111" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 8:46 AM Subject: [amibroker] Re: Pattern Searching within AB > Bill, > > I have my own concept of waves and cycles but I do agree that as long > as there is sufficient volume they will form, even below daily > timeframes. There is a cut off point though, below which I expect > them to be fragmental, and below that where they don't exist at all. > > (I am interested to know what happens below the cut off point as > well). > > I have also found that while waves and cycles are generally > characterized by variance there is an underlying sameness about them > (almost like a template that varies in dimension rather than shape). > > (I don't use Fibonacci - I am sceptical but maybe we can swap notes > on that some day). > > What is EW and So9? > > brian_z > > > > > --- In [email protected], "wavemechanic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> >> Herman: >> >> RT systems may or may not work for EOD or higher times. Depending > on the time frame, indicator-based system parameters often tend to be > time frame specific. On the other hand, systems based on price > patterns and levels (e.g., Fibonacci patterns, triangles, EW, So9, > etc.) are fractal and work very well for all time frames. >> >> Bill >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Herman >> To: brian_z111 >> Cc: [email protected] >> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 6:12 AM >> Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Pattern Searching within AB >> >> >> without specific reference to Brian's email below, in my limited > experience I found that: >> >> >> >> >> 1) EOD bars are distinctly different from intraday bars. imo, the > primary reason for this is that, except perhaps at the market open or > close, intraday bars are not synchronized at any point in time. EOD > bars have distinct patterns that can be traded but do not exist in > intraday bars, i.e., Real-time systems do not necessarily work in the > daily time frame, or vise versa. >> >> >> >> >> 2) Intraday bars gain random content quickly when you reduce the > period to less than about 3 minutes. At which period this happens > depends also on volume. >> >> >> >> >> 3) In very short time frames, say less than 1-2 minutes, data and > Internet delays start to play a major role. In this range it is > possible to develop HG systems with local data that fail in real- > trading. See my post on this on the UKB. Delays also vary with the > number of stocks you trade (your system's resources) and market > volume (at open and close). >> >> >> >> >> 4) While I have never worked with longer than daily bars i know > that daily bars have features that do not, and cannot, exist in > weekly and longer time frames. Similarly, weekly and longer periods > may have their own unique features. >> >> >> >> >> 5) imo, the OHLC bar structure is obsolete. Imagine the design > advantage if you knew the HL precedence. Of course, in the majority > of cases, you can be sneaky and calculate HL precedence by assuming > that the price follows path of least resistance from the Open to the > Close... or subscribe to real-time data. >> >> >> >> >> best regards, >> >> herman >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> For tips on developing Real-Time Auto-Trading systems visit: >> >> http://www.amibroker.org/userkb/ >> >> >> >> >> Saturday, March 1, 2008, 11:47:43 PM, you wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > Rounding off my contribution on this topic. >> >> >> >> >> > Most of my work, so far, has been based around EOD data > (exclusively in >> >> > stocks). >> >> >> >> >> > I consider that daily bars are the natural rhythm of the market. >> >> > I also regard them as nothing more, nor less, than barometers > of market >> >> > sentiment. >> >> >> >> >> > For macro trading, if we look at the markets in weekly/monthly > time >> >> > frames we are seeing exactly the same information that we see > in daily >> >> > timeframes,except that is an approximate summary. >> >> >> >> >> > Traders who want to see the macro picture with greater accuracy > can do >> >> > this by marking the major pivot points (write code for the > daily >> >> > timeframe to do that). >> >> >> >> >> > (Sorry I can't provide code at the moment). >> >> >> >> >> > If this is done it is successful, although I concede it is > harder to >> >> > follow the visual cues because of the limited number of bars > that can >> >> > be viewed in one screen (technically it is successful but I > have no >> >> > comment, for or against, it's usefulness for trading). >> >> >> >> >> > IMO intraday bars, at around the 5 minute mark, are an > extension of the >> >> > daily timeframe and they can be successfully used to finesse > entries >> >> > and exists for EOD strategies. >> >> >> >> >> > As an aside. >> >> >> >> >> > Re: single bar patterns. >> >> >> >> >> > Once again, IMO, they are a summary (shorthand notation) of the >> >> > underlying bar patterns. >> >> > I have made an effort to train my mind to know what info the > single bar >> >> > patterns are relaying to us, about the 'mood' of the market, in > that >> >> > timeframe (similar to the way in which musicians read music). >> >> >> >> >> > I don't know exactly how successful I have been, or how much > that >> >> > impacts on my trading, but it is quite good fun and it does > have it's >> >> > uses. >> >> >> >> >> > (It is consistent with my intention to strengthen my mental >> >> > capabilities, for trading, by not over relying on computer > memory). >> >> >> >> >> > From my point of view, very little of what else is available >> >> > in 'classical' TA is of any value. >> >> >> >> >> > I consider that the topic (patten recognition) is finite and > that at a >> >> > personal level I have conceptually exhausted the subject (after > many >> >> > hours of contemplation). That doesn't mean I have exhausted all > effort >> >> > in that area - there are still new patterns (to me) to be found > and >> >> > more detail to obtain about those I have considered. >> >> >> >> >> > I also consider that macro trading doesn't end there. >> >> >> >> >> > There is the other side of the coin. >> >> >> >> >> > If we are relying entirely on patterns, for macro trading, then > we are >> >> > only flying around on one wing (I will comment on supplementary > methods >> >> > somewhere down the track). >> >> >> >> >> > Intra-day trading, however, is another cup of tea. >> >> >> >> >> > The intraday 'patterns' are influenced markedly by the > mechanics of the >> >> > market (exchange hours, overnight cessation of trading, morning > versus >> >> > afternoon session, opening versus close, carryover action from > the >> >> > previous day etc) so it has some peculiarities of it's own. >> >> >> >> >> > Further to that, at the sub-micro level (tick trading), > continuity >> >> > breaks down into discrete packages (perhaps there are new > things to >> >> > find out about that). >> >> >> >> >> > I look forward to Hermans efforts to push that boundary. >> >> >> >> >> > Like Herman I believe that the more we learn about what is > ahead of us >> >> > the more we understand what is behind us. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > brian_z >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > --- In [email protected], "brian_z111" <brian_z111@> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Should be fun. >> >> >> >> >> >> Not posting against you. >> >> >> >> >> >> Just a philosophical observation. >> >> >> >> >> >> In nature, when we zoom in, we move from the discrete to the >> >> >> continuous. Order disintegrates at the boundary (objectively > we 'see' >> >> >> no organizing principality in CHAOS). >> >> >> >> >> >> In trading, when we zoom in, we move from the, apparently, > continuous >> >> >> to the discrete. >> >> >> >> >> >> brian_z >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Please note that this group is for discussion between users > only. >> >> >> >> >> > To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to >> >> > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com >> >> >> >> >> > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check > DEVLOG: >> >> > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/ >> >> >> >> >> > For other support material please check also: >> >> > http://www.amibroker.com/support.html >> >> > >> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> >> >> >> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/ >> >> >> >> >> > Individual Email | Traditional >> >> >> >> >> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join >> >> > (Yahoo! ID required) >> >> >> >> >> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.2/1304 - Release Date: > 2/29/2008 8:18 AM >> > > > > > Please note that this group is for discussion between users only. > > To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com > > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG: > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/ > > For other support material please check also: > http://www.amibroker.com/support.html > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.2/1304 - Release Date: 2/29/2008 > 8:18 AM > >
