BBmac's occassional thread

[bbmac]

23.6% of the last 1hr swing 6217-6190 is where the supply came in after a 1st b/o of the congestion on 15min-1hr off yesterday's lo (6190.)

G/L

 

[bbmac]

market in congestion at the moment

Decent enough pa trigger provides me with the 1st trade of the day near the bottom of the recent congestion. This false 1st b/o and at least an attempt at a 2nd b/o is a recurring pattern.

G/L

 

[bbmac]

2nd b/o attempt fails

Price breaks below yesterday's lo..looking bearish now...at least atm.

Nearest to price and below it, Will be looking at 6078-59 area as potential support, and above here at both the potential sbr/res for any re-entries to the downtrend....will see what develops.

G/L

 

[DashRiprock]

Decent enough pa trigger provides me with the 1st trade of the day near the bottom of the recent congestion. This false 1st b/o and at least an attempt at a 2nd b/o is a recurring pattern.

G/L

can you clarify where your entry, stop and exit was on this trade please?

 

[bbmac]

reply to Q? / Price moves to potential support

can you clarify where your entry, stop and exit was on this trade please?

Gladly, entry was on close of 2nd PB, theorerical stop was under 1st one, I placed an actual stop at B/e when +10 ahead and got stopped for B/e.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There followed a 5min bearish thrust b/o set-up....entry on close of the bear thrust candle ..theoretical stop above it...actual stop placed at b/e when +10 ahead, ... exited for +13.9 as price came down to the potential support zone discussed today and yetserday in posts above (6078-59)...a 1min regular divergence based reversal/pullback set-up developed here but no supporting 5min set-up so have not gone long here (yet?...will see what if anything develops.)

The 1min set-up was here

Incidentally that great PB candle was not replicated on other 1min chart feeds or by my broker ?

Under this 6078-59 zone lookingat 5997-91-61 and would prefer a deep test of that potential supp zone....(there are potential supp factors at 6020/18 but not rated very highly so will be cautious if price tests and get a set-up.) Other than this looking to again get with the downtrend if a set-up develops.

 

[bbmac]

immediate potential support zone 6078-59

Price has certainly stalled here but I wonder how much demand is here, no set-up yet to get long from here for me on 1/5/ (30min). Noting daily s1 pivot (I count all calculated pivots as minor potential supp/res factors) @ 6055 also.

So, Flipping to the 3/15/(1hr) t/f combo I saw a 3min regular divergence based reversal/pullback set-up with an as yet unvalidated (and imperfectly formed) 15min reversal set-up supporting....I missed the entry anyway and whilst tempted by the 5min bullish engulf trigger close of 0915 candle..stayed flat as the syupporting 15min set-up was not as I would like to see it formed.

Price has made a low at 6059 so far - bottom of that potential support zone.

Will carry on looking to get 'with trend' or 'counter trend' at potential support... and looking below current lo 6020/18 are 2 x potential supp factors but not highly rated whilst 5990-61 looks more promising re rating...will see what develops.

 

[bbmac]

4hr view etc..

4hr shows the previous 1hr/4hr swing lo zone that is providing the demand...price tested it's extreme and shame I missed the the 3min set-up posted above (should have been watching more closely instead of posting - lol !) I even missed the chance of the 5min bullish engulfing trigger on close of it's 0915 candle...Then close of the 0940 5min candle provided another chance in a bullish candle formation on that t/f...+9.4 from this booked. Soft daily target secured, will take it easy now.

G/L

 

[bbmac]

pips left on the table

always, -lol...you book profit and price shoots a further 20pips up Lol...shame ! One for the shoulda woulda coulda file I think. It remains my worse habit, ..better than I used to be but still reaching for better...maybe I'm just a scalper at heart...No musn't make excuses !!

G/L

 

[bbmac]

old adage

Worrry about those you are are in, not those you are not..

How true but it's just human nature and another example of why instinctive human nature often times runs counter to that required in trading, hence the difficulty...you simply have to develop the necessary trading psychology framework.

No way back in yet, I'm not 'buying hi.'

G/L

 

[wackypete2]

Re: pips left on the table

always, -lol...you book profit and price shoots a further 20pips up Lol...shame ! One for the shoulda woulda coulda file I think. It remains my worse habit, ..better than I used to be but still reaching for better...maybe I'm just a scalper at heart...No musn't make excuses !!

G/L

Yeah, that's painful. They say you can't teach an old dog new tricks so I keep pretending I'm young.

Good thread!

Peter

 

[bbmac]

Re: pips left on the table

Yeah, that's painful. They say you can't teach an old dog new tricks so I keep pretending I'm young.

Good thread!

Peter

Lol That's one way of doing it.

 

[bbmac]

15min

15min congestion has had a false upside B/o, a downside 1st B/o, a pullback off the support and now an attempt at a 2nd downside B/o ? Decent enough PB trigger at top of the congestion range for a short entry for at least an attempt at a 2nd B/o but missed it.

G/L

 

[bbmac]

price has consolidated somewhat off the 6128 pullback Hi (from6059 current daily lo.)

Price has pulled back to 61.8% of the 6059-6128 move around the area of yesterday's low...I wonder whether the fact that the pullback from 6059 didn't make a high above the last 15m/30m/1hr swing Hi at 6141 means that the sentiment remain generally bearish ? Whatever the case my final trade of the day came courstey of a 1min regular bullish divergence set-up @ that 61.8% fib (supported by a 3min hidden divergence based set-up.) The 1min set-up is below...as for the 3min set-up well there was not much of a 15min uptrend to re-enter so didn't put too much store on the supporting nature of the set-up or indeed of itseflf but it was there nonetheless. I just closed for +5.1 pips only.

Weather here in C.London is v.nice...gonna have a walk out this p.m so finishing here so I can shower etc and not frighten the horses..

1min set-up was here

Final look at the current near-term 1hr screensot. Folks over in another forum convinced we'll see 1.60 today ? Time will tell - as always.

G/L

 

[bbmac]

Re: post above

...I wonder whether the fact that the pullback from 6059 didn't make a high above the last 15m/30m/1hr swing Hi at 6141 means that the sentiment remains generally bearish ? .... Folks over in another forum convinced we'll see 1.60 today ? ....

Just came back in after a great afternoon in the heatwave ( It's all relative ! ) I wonder no more, sentiment did indeed remainbearish with a further leg down ...and those 'folks' were just about right Lol.

G/L

 

[bbmac]

' Fame costs and here is where you start paying '

Those of a certain age will remember that famous line that the instructor said to her class in the Fame TV series and Film of the early 80's.

It reminds me of what a hi-probability trading edge costs..Let me explain.

I make an argument for Hi probability trading edges -vs- Lower probability trading edges in the transcript document that I posted after the Seminar I spoke at for T2W members back in late January. (The doc containing that argument can be downloaded from here post #97 here: http://www.trade2win.com/boards/gen...free-seminar-london-sat-29-jan-2011-a-13.html )

Accepting ( or not) the case for acquiring a consistently hi-probability trading edge, it will inevitably involve a lot of/some well researched and observed confluential factors and these factors take time to learn let alone put into practice. For eg My own trading edge is derived of various repeating 'Full' entry set-ups and simple rules associated with the overall price action (opa) conditions and potential support/resistance at which they can be traded with the highest probability / or rejected should these simple rules not be met.

The entry set-ups are derived from

a. simple repeating indicator set-ups derived from repeating oscillator divergence patterns and repeating bollinger band patterns

-that combine with -

b. The same

-and / or -

c. simple repeating fractal geometric price patterns

On the same and higher t/f to give an overall 'Full Set-up,' should it be 'validated' by a repeating individual/combination of price action candle/s trigger for market entry

So far so good, First you have to learn the simple repeating indicator set-ups and then the simple repeating fractal geometric price patterns to the standard of instant real time recognition. This is not rocket science and with application they can be learnt fairly quickly.

Now, as mentioned above there are rules/criteria that must be met if a set-up is to be traded with the highest probability of a successful outcome and these are where the Set-ups become the Trading Edge (a critical distinction.) They revolve around;

a. For Re-entry (to next higher t/f [+] trend) set-ups, wether an opa/general trend is present on at least the next t/f trend

b. For Reversal/Pullback (counter trend) set-ups; wether certain combinations of the 'Full' set-ups and elements comprising the Full set-ups are present on the t/f being used as the trigger for entry and at leastthe t/f above that - for each potential trend strength (ie based on how many t/f's are exhibiting the opa trend that is being traded against.)

Sounds involved ? Complicated ? Well less so than you would think because again it is just a case of memorising these combinations...this is simply a case of application, effort, time and practice.

The further and final rules/criteria that have to be satisfied before acting upon a 'Full' set-up revolve around wether certain pre-identified repeating combinations of potential support/resistance/sbr/rbs factors are present where the Full entry set-up develops. These certain repeating potential supp/res factor combinations are rated as to their potential strength (should a qualifying Full set-up develop there,) and the pinciple used for this is confluence, eg:

A previous 1hr swing hi/lo that exists as the same on the 4hr t/f with say a fib or a trendline is likely to be higher in probability for potential resistance/rbs and support/sbr respectively than say just a fib.

These are even easier to remember because in effect you just have to remember the minimum repeating combination that qualifies. They are rated so that more risk can be used on the highest probability set-up than those less well rated. There are only 4 ratings and nothing else qualifies so again with application, effort, practice and time it can be achieved.

Now putting all this together does take time and practice and even now I sometimes refer to a cheat sheet/aide memoire I have on my office wall, (not often.) Do it often enough and you reach the stage of 'unconscious competence' from 'conscious competence' that follows the 2 previous stages of learning, that of conscious incompetence' and 'unconscious incompetence' (IE I don't want to get all Donald Rumsfeld on ya but basically we start out not knowing what we don't know/need to learn, [unconscious incompetence,] then we become aware of the things we don't know/need to learn [conscious incompetence,] then we become aware of the things that we do know/have learned [conscious competence,] and finally we are no longer consciously aware of the things we now know from learning/practice, we just do it , it's like 2nd nature now [unconscious incompetence'.]

Whatever your edge, whatever your market/instrument, to achieve the highest probability outcomes will inevitably involve some long tested filters (rules/criteria for entry that must be satisfied,) and these you will have have worked out by looking at and trying to figure out across a large representative sample, why your set-up (s) work when they work and fail when they fail. I would argue that there is probably a link between the highest probability set-ups and the number of/type of these filters/rules that have to be satisfied before a market entry is made.

For me I know what I am looking for, and where I am looking for it and why.

Now I am not suggesting that everyone should have such a trading edge, indeed some will (and do) hate it. Somke even vehemently believe that such a hi probability is possible, based largely on the fact that they have not achieved it. A Hi-probability trading edge is not necessary to achieve a consistent net gain but per the arguments I make in the document referred to above, and particularly for inexperienced traders, I believe it to be preferable to their chances of lasting consistenct/success for the reasons outlined therein.

Whatever your trading edge though, don't just trade a set-up because it is there, try to work out why they work when they work and fail when they fail....and if you can do that even simple filters can make all the difference to the strike rate achieved.

So as the Fame Instructor might have said said ' Hi-probability costs- and here is where you start paying '

G/L

 

[bbmac]

A simple question/filter

The most basic question that you should seek to answer when considering a market entry is;

'Why would there be other buyers/sellers at your proposed point of market entry that can move the market higher/lower respectively in my favour.' It's a simple enough question, and senible enough, but I wonder how many of us ask it before we enter the market? It represents I think the difference between trading a set-up because it is there and trading a set-up because it has a high probability of a successful outcome.

G/L

 

[bbmac]

Leaving pips on the table

Some one once said to me that their new trading edge was getting in when I get out and it's a good point. I continue to work on the exits...it is not yet 'unconscious competence' as far as they go ! Lol...better than they were but we should never stop analysing our performance and seeking to pinpoint and improve the weaknesses.

G/L

 

[DDI]

Re: Leaving pips on the table

Some one once said to me that their new trading edge was getting in when I get out and it's a good point. I continue to work on the exits...it is not yet 'unconscious competence' as far as they go ! Lol...better than they were but we should never stop analysing our performance and seeking to pinpoint and improve the weaknesses.

G/L

tell me about it. I have come to accept that if I take profits market will go further in my direction, and if I dont take it, it will reverse against me. Its a fact of life for me.

 

[barjon]

Re: pips left on the table

always, -lol...you book profit and price shoots a further 20pips up Lol...shame ! One for the shoulda woulda coulda file I think. It remains my worse habit, ..better than I used to be but still reaching for better...maybe I'm just a scalper at heart...No musn't make excuses !!

G/L

bbmac

I'd be interested to know if you have worked as hard on your exit criteria as you have on the entry side. If so, I'd hazard that you have found that confluence is not the answer, as you use on the entry side, but rather a sequential series of events each lighting a warning light of different wattage depending on the nature of the event and where it occurs.

jon

 

[bbmac]

Reply

Hi Jon

Thanks for the input/observations..you are right about the exit side, all my initial efforts went into the entry side and then I had to work on a methodology for the exit side which is based on a minimum target for each set-up scenario followed by an 'over minimum target + ' methodology for capturing more pips from a move.

The real difficulty when trading a swing edge on the lower t/f's is that you could well be (and often are) in at the very top/bottom of a big move so it can be gauling to see it develop as such. For example the 2.1162 top in cable I sold for something like +8pips and of course it went down to 1.3505 Lol - of course there was no way of telling it would do that but the exit methodology I have developed does at least allow for the possibility. This said, I am still all in all out and should maybe consider scaling out rather than leaving all in and them getting spooked by a pullback in the move and taking profit prematurely.

It's a work in progress, and it's more a case of adhering to the methodology than changing it for now. I seem to be more disciplined on the entries than exits to this extent.

bbmac

I'd be interested to know if you have worked as hard on your exit criteria as you have on the entry side. If so, I'd hazard that you have found that confluence is not the answer, as you use on the entry side, but rather a sequential series of events each lighting a warning light of different wattage depending on the nature of the event and where it occurs.

jon