Fibonacci Retracements

[jacinto]

Here's something from today....

I like the idea of dynamic fibs combined with S+R on an hourly chart with no indicators though I do have a squeeze (yellow bars) on the second chart.

First chart gave me a short. Second chart confirmed.

never heard of a dynamic fib.....then again, my knowledge of fibs as sophisticated as the sophistication of english food :cheesy: ................seriously, care to point me where to read about them.

i typically eyeball the fibs (i.e 1/3, 1/2/ or 2/3 of a move, but thats about it), would be interested to understand the concept of a dynamic fib. Edit: my preferred eyeballing is on 4hr breakout bars

j

 

[rols]

never heard of a dynamic fib.....then again, my knowledge of fibs as sophisticated as the sophistication of english food :cheesy: ................seriously, care to point me where to read about them.

i typically eyeball the fibs (i.e 1/3, 1/2/ or 2/3 of a move, but thats about it), would be interested to understand the concept of a dynamic fib. Edit: my preferred eyeballing is on 4hr breakout bars

j

Dynamic fibs change as the daily High and Low changes.

The market changes and so must our fibbies on all timeframes otherwise we become fossilised waiting for those magic numbers which aren't actually magic but insightful perhaps only for those with insight and hindsight.

Combine this with dynamic S+R on your prefered timeframe and you have a wonderful state of confusion or illumination.

 

[TheBramble]

What stuns me still is the commonly held belief that Fibs are real. The man (Pisaro whatever) NEVER EXISTED in reality! He was a product of fable. He had no existence in reality. And if you care to check any/all of the ratios commonly cited in this series, you'll find they always fall flat.

Look at the 50% 'fib level'. Where did that ever come from? Not even in the 'original' series that’s for sure.

And the measurements of ratios from umbilical to throat, arm to finger, apex of Gizeh (southern plan) to base, pine cone seed distribution – none of them actually conform at all. Please check it out for yourself.

Take a look out of your window at the nearest tree. Do the branches follow the fib series in terms of number as they progress up the trunk? No, of course not. Unless it’s a fasting, a Lombardy poplar of similar. Common in the geographical area from which Fibonacci’s real originator perhaps set about his (or her) subterfuge?

There are no two humans so alike their relative architecture can be so accurately proportioned. Same as trees – doesn’t exit I nature and doesn’t exist except in man’s mind.

So yes Rols, fibs do change on a daily basis, just like every other aspect of trading, astrology, necromancy and divination. They are all outputs of imagination – not empirical measures of external reality

Most of the ‘esoterics’ we witness in the markets and elsewhere are brought to fruition and ulitmately recognition by our expectation of their existence rather than through any outside, external or pre-existing force or intent.

 

[new_trader]

Fib 50%

Look at the 50% 'fib level'. Where did that ever come from? Not even in the 'original' series that’s for sure.

I have asked this question a few times before and not a single FIB fanatic has come forward with an explanation.

25%, 50%, 75%, 100% are close to FIB levels used as indicators. I'm sure if you drew these points on a number of charts they will line up with something.

 

[trendie]

I have asked this question a few times before and not a single FIB fanatic has come forward with an explanation.

25%, 50%, 75%, 100% are close to FIB levels used as indicators. I'm sure if you drew these points on a number of charts they will line up with something.

or reverse engineer it.
ie; create a database of bars where there is a low-high-low or high-low-high, and then use some kind of percentage retrace to identify a genuine pullback of sorts, and then calculate the amount it ACTUALLY fell back, and build up a log of most popular retraces.

does that make sense?
(eg; if price is 100, and factor is 20%, then price needs to fallback to 80 or less, create a high-low-high (swing-point) to be considered valid (at any price below 80).
then record that and create a graph of all swing-lows and highs and see if they cluster around any particular percentages.

(too early in the morning)

 

[jacinto]

or reverse engineer it.
ie; create a database of bars where there is a low-high-low or high-low-high, and then use some kind of percentage retrace to identify a genuine pullback of sorts, and then calculate the amount it ACTUALLY fell back, and build up a log of most popular retraces.

does that make sense?
(eg; if price is 100, and factor is 20%, then price needs to fallback to 80 or less, create a high-low-high (swing-point) to be considered valid (at any price below 80).
then record that and create a graph of all swing-lows and highs and see if they cluster around any particular percentages.

(too early in the morning)

mmmmm........isnt it just easiear to read the bars ?:cheesy:

 

[rols]

Most of the ‘esoterics’ we witness in the markets and elsewhere are brought to fruition and ulitmately recognition by our expectation of their existence rather than through any outside, external or pre-existing force or intent.

I would respectfully suggest that this is not really any different from your dissertation on whether Google will go up or down.

Both methods crate a framework upon which to hang our own egocentric perceptions.

 

[TheBramble]

There is nothing esoteric in looking at price and volume development. My recognition of what ‘is’ does not cause ‘it’ to exist. I appreciate the point you may have been trying to make and almost did, was that any analysis, no matter how qualified and careful will take you away from the pure primal perception of what is happening and involve subjective judgements to be made – otherwise we would just sit there, gazing at our screens and do nothing. The degree to which these judgement facilitate profitable utilisation of the resultant analysis is a function of the knowledge and skill of the analyst. True. That I have neither ego nor cash invested in GOOG or anything else for that matter gives me reasonable confidence that my analysis is clean enough to use should I wish to for trading purposes.

However, my current analysis of GOOG provides a framework to consider a plan of action for pretty much every eventuality, even if that action is to do nothing. It’s called ‘winning whatever’ and isn’t a bad place to be. I have no idea which of the scenarios I suggest might develop actually will although I do have a declared bias based on technical factors explained in detail, but to be sure, one of these scenarios will develop There’s nothing esoteric in that. Recognition of that scenario having developed does not cause it to exist in my head alone – it exists ‘out there’ for all to see.

 

[rols]

There is nothing esoteric in looking at price and volume development..

In 2005

Taking a trade (as an experienced trader) is not a prediction. It is a commitment to an outcome which is belived to have a higher probability than any other - the "statistical probability of X following Y"...

It is based on price and volume, indicators, Gann, Gilmore, Pythagoras, Fibonacci, Support & Resistance and the whole pantheon of traders tools.

But it is a probability - not a prediction.

 

[Joules MM1]

What stuns me still is the commonly held belief that Fibs are real. The man (Pisaro whatever) NEVER EXISTED in reality! He was a product of fable. He had no existence in reality. And if you care to check any/all of the ratios commonly cited in this series, you'll find they always fall flat.

Look at the 50% 'fib level'. Where did that ever come from? Not even in the 'original' series that’s for sure.

Ok, Tony, time to cut your blatant ramble..........first, if there is an original ratio then WHO came up with it, if not Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci? Is the statue that is erected in his name a fake pose? Who invented the supposed fable? How are you going to prove this ? I mean, by what process are you going to prove, to us, that this persons history is ficticious? Display to us how the ratios "fall flat" .

That the 50% ratio is not part of the sequence, is probably the only part you have correct so far.

I am keen to hear your lucid and indepth reply.

http://faculty.evansville.edu/ck6/bstud/fibo.html (a part picture of his statue)

Joules

 

[jacinto]

ok chaps,

im really looking forward to this discussion, but it would be great if it was a civil one...


"no pie throwing please" as Barjon says

edit: i got myself some yellow and red cards, and i am an awful referee. first pie, first card.

 

[TheBramble]

In 2005

What's your point? I was listing the various methods by which traders placed trades.

To reiterate, Fibs work because they are "brought to fruition and ulitmately recognition by our expectation of their existence ". That doesn't mean they have any existence outside of that. Which was quite my original point.

Whether I would choose to use other traders' anticipations of this or any other hocus pocus based on imagimary friends or whatever else is absolutely beyond question.

 

[rols]

Whether I would choose to use other traders' anticipations of this or any other hocus pocus based on imagimary friends or whatever else is absolutely beyond question.

Is this a real word or an imaginary one?

:cheesy:

 

[TheBramble]

Ok, Tony, time to cut your blatant ramble..........first, if there is an original ratio then WHO came up with it, if not Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci? Is the statue that is erected in his name a fake pose? Who invented the supposed fable? How are you going to prove this ? I mean, by what process are you going to prove, to us, that this persons history is ficticious? Display to us how the ratios "fall flat" .

That the 50% ratio is not part of the sequence, is probably the only part you have correct so far.

I am keen to hear your lucid and indepth reply.

http://faculty.evansville.edu/ck6/bstud/fibo.html (a part picture of his statue)

Joules

Joules, you do love to joust with the big boys don't you.

To use your link as a first port of call allow me to quote from it so there is no question of my being selective,

"Unfortunately, not much is known about Fibonacci's personal life". In fact, there are no contemporary references to this man. But then there aren't for Jesus of Nazareth either.

"No portraits of Fibonacci exist. Possibly, the imaginative description of the education, clothes and housing of people of medieval Pisa, as given in [4], was applicable to Fibonacci. " Possibly indeed. I guess the statue you refer to is an artist's impression.

"According to some writers, a mathematical tournament between Fibonacci and other mathematicians took place, but this does not seem to have been the case". Yep. All references to the Rabbit problem and the maths games all relate back to a single source. None of which have any contemporary support or reference.

"The last we hear of Fibonacci is in a document issued by the commune of Pisa in 1240. This granted an annual honorarium of 20 Pisan pounds, plus expenses, for community services to "the discreet and learned man, Master Leonardo" [4].

No one knows when Fibonacci died nor under what circumstances his death occurred."

And

"What did Fibonacci look like? Did Fibonacci marry? Did he have any children? What was the state of his health? his wealth? What were his political views? To what extent, if at all, did he rely on the works of the Greeks (e.g. the (now) lost books of Diophantus)? It is a great pity indeed that we do not know more about this remarkable man." Absolutely. In fact, what we do know is actually quite sparse. You'd have to pay big bucks to get an id wipe that good these days.

So rather than throw down the gauntlet and suggest I prove he didn't exist (let's keep Black Swans out of this for now, but you know exactly what I mean), I'm going to suggest you find contemporary references they prove he did. And can I suggest you check your research more thoroughly before providing any further 'support' for your case as your last one has you clearly looking a little surprised at the smoking gun in your hand the hole in your foot.

 

[TheBramble]

Is this a real word or an imaginary one?

:cheesy:

If you're going to take the role of professional typo sweeper and nit picker I'll see if Sharky can get you a broom.

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines” – RWE

I like to allow the occasional slip to pass un-edited. I’ll leave the appearance of perfection to others.

edit: afterthought - Don't forget I am in possession of photographic material which would, if released to these boards, confirm to those who may have previously only harboured suspicions, their darkest fears.

 

[TheBramble]

Display to us how the ratios "fall flat" .

Missed that bit. Will address later after trading close.

 

[jacinto]

Missed that bit. Will address later after trading close.

thank you, i got to feed a little one, monitor a trade and be a piespotter

 

[trendie]

does it matter whether he existed or not?
the ratios are still the ratios.

shouldnt we be focussing on the essence of the idea, and its applicability (or not) ?

EDIT: in fact whether they exist in nature or not, is also rather moot.

do they exist specifically in the markets, can they be predicted, and can they be traded proftiably?
arent these the essences of this thread?

 

[rols]

If you're going to take the role of professional typo sweeper and nit picker I'll see if Sharky can get you a broom.

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines” – RWE

I like to allow the occasional slip to pass un-edited. I’ll leave the appearance of perfection to others.

edit: afterthought - Don't forget I am in possession of photographic material which would, if released to these boards, confirm to those who may have previously only harboured suspicions, their darkest fears.

Good to have you back oh prickly one....

 

[Lightning McQueen]

Leonardo Pisano Fibonacci - fact or fiction

In historical references this guy existed, for starters he wrote the book Liber abaci (1202, The Book of Calculation), which gave modern numbers to the western world, of which the english translation is available to purchase, if your into 800 year old stuff.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fibonaccis-...0277565?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1185344956&sr=8-1

(I dare someone to go to the bottom of the above link and click the "I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book" bit and leave a message).

Also Liber quadratorum (1225, The Book of Square Numbers), and other books, some lost works too.

The Fibonacci sequence appears in the work Liber abaci as part of a series of exercises of the new numerical system, the now famous rabbit problem.

He was a favourite guest of the Holy Roman emperor Frederick II

He is mentioned in dispatches of the town of pisa and given an award for services rendered.

Admittedly, not much is evident from his personal life, tabloid journalists and paparazzi obviously had not been invented 800 odd years ago, as most of the population probably couldnt read, there wouldn't be much demand for the sun or star..... " 'ere, 'av ye copped a load o' they thar fair norks on page III. "

Ok, the Fibonacci part of his name was cooked up a bit later on. but there's plenty to show he existed in life and was rather a clever chap of his time.