The Markets, Trading & Charts Thread

[kevsta]

Gold didnt do what the goldbug in me was hoping for, and although i would like to think this might be a breakout beginning, and the start of a big push 2, it is still in Level 3 extension and if we get a vertical red candle back down again it could just as easily run 1-3 cycles to the downside again, as this be halfway through the second push.

entirely undecided, no clue. and probably far too biased to be objective.

edit, although looked at closer in using the hourly pushes, if I had to bet, I'd say that's push 1 underway

and that yellow thing, definite system fail lol, no idea about that at all. as I said, nothings perfect

 

[kevsta]

Nope. Can't see them.

It's possibly like the way I can't see red and green like normal people. I just can't see the numbers the colored dots make, but people with normal color vision swear they're there.

Maybe we should coin a term: Chart Pattern Recognition Blindness.

CPRB for short.

haha, but seriously, you are colourblind? that might explain a lot, would black and white and greys make things easier? am using colours to brighten up dull dull charts, but if its counter productive, happy to switch? if you're really actually interested?

 

[kevsta]

algos doing their thing in the S&P today

At 15:45:31 on a quiet Friday afternoon in August, someone decided that they needed to buy 7,000 e-mini contracts (or $582 million notional of equity exposure). By the end of that minute, 23,679 contracts had traded as 'someone' needed $2 billion notional expsoure to the S&P 500 as it traded up to its highs of the day (and didn't care about phishing the entire order book). What is perhaps just as intriguing is the patterns seen in the options complex as VIX futures and ETFs were the first to crack as 330RAMPCAPITAL LLC stepped in, and then again as the mystery TWO-BILLION-BUYER came to play at 345ET. All of which makes perfect sense to any rational human asset manager or trader who cares not one bit about best execution, fiduciary duty, or simply whether they win or lose... Here is the very visible hand in all its glory...

 

[Fast Eddie B]

haha, but seriously, you are colourblind?

Anecdote:

In a high school biology class they passed out our new textbooks. I opened it to a random place, a chapter on vision. There was a picture with a bunch of dots and the word "ONION", clear as can be. Then I read the caption, which went something like:

"This is an example of the Ishihara Color Vision Test. Those with normal color vision will see the word "COLOR", those with a red/green deficiency will see the word "ONION", and totally colorblind individuals will see nothing at all."

I thought it must be a mistake, and showed it to others, who immediately saw "COLOR". They could even show me the letter "C", where I was seeing an "O", obviously confusing red and green to close the "C" into an "O". First idea I had I saw things differently from others.

As an aside, in order to get my Commercial pilot's license, I had to apply for and get a "Statement of Demonstrated Ability" by flying with an FAA examiner and correctly identifying aviation red, green and white light gun signals.

...and that might explain a lot, would black and white and greys make things easier? am using colours to brighten up dull dull charts, but if its counter productive, happy to switch? if you're really actually interested?

Nope - all the colors in the chart come through bright and clear - or at least what is bright and clear for me. But if you start showing muddy reds next to muddy greens, I'm in real trouble!

Anyway, my working hypothesis is still that your patterns are illusory - but I remain open to the possibility I have that wrong.

 

[psionl0]

then d/l and TRY IT

That is just pure secret code.

you have to imagine, trying to make a directional bet, at a point, with a limit to how far it can run the other way (your stoploss)

I think I get this (but I am probably wrong).

where can you effectively take trades on the chart with no running back against you and lots of movement in front?

Sometime I think you don't want to be understood.

 

[AdMan]

So kevsta is playing with pretend money, refuses to share any of his actual results (if he has any) because they may be down (whatever he calls being down), and simply posts chart after chart of his after-the-fact analyses where he tries to demonstrate that he foresaw all these movements, but he can't actually forerecast anything with any accuracy significantly above chance.

Did I miss anything?

And an OT question, is there a way to block the most annoying animated gif on the Internet?

 

[kevsta]

but he can't actually forerecast anything with any accuracy significantly above chance.

Did I miss anything?

basic comprehension classes? remedial work? your glasses?

And an OT question, is there a way to block the most annoying animated gif on the Internet?

close your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and go nunununununNUNUU!!!!!

 

[kevsta]

That is just pure secret code.

d/l?
I think I get this (but I am probably wrong).[/quote]

like this?

Sometime I think you don't want to be understood.

?? really? as per the picture above, if your stoploss can only be 20 pips (max risk) you need to be taking the trade at a point where it will not run 20 pips backwards against you and stop you out, and more importantly there is potentially at least 2:1 reward in front of you with the likely movement.

If you are in the wrong place, or facing the wrong way, thats never even possible. If you happen to be facing the right way, the only question is will you get stopped out (lose) before being correct.



does this help?

 

[kevsta]

AAPL some more.

if the price just breaks out upwards from here and carries on running, this would be a system fail. interesting that it was algo activity and the breaking of the AAPL $500 barrier that seemingly took the NASDAQ out for 3 hours too eh, you can see the missing bar on the chart. "Markets" lulz.

on the bigger scale, you can see the precision of the entry, at the extreme tip of the stoprun pin. you can also see what the 3 pushes down before it reversed upwards look like on the bigger scale

at this level, last week's move could be seen as Push 1, however because we know markets dont generally move in straight lines (hit the stops hit the stops, pop) even if it is going up next, the probability is very high that we drop down a bit first and then surge from there. the stoploss is at zero on the $million trade anyway, but it might get to $3 or even $5m yet.

 

[kevsta]

Anecdote:

In a high school biology class they passed out our new textbooks. I opened it to a random place, a chapter on vision. There was a picture with a bunch of dots and the word "ONION", clear as can be. Then I read the caption, which went something like:

"This is an example of the Ishihara Color Vision Test. Those with normal color vision will see the word "COLOR", those with a red/green deficiency will see the word "ONION", and totally colorblind individuals will see nothing at all."

I thought it must be a mistake, and showed it to others, who immediately saw "COLOR". They could even show me the letter "C", where I was seeing an "O", obviously confusing red and green to close the "C" into an "O". First idea I had I saw things differently from others.

As an aside, in order to get my Commercial pilot's license, I had to apply for and get a "Statement of Demonstrated Ability" by flying with an FAA examiner and correctly identifying aviation red, green and white light gun signals.

Nope - all the colors in the chart come through bright and clear - or at least what is bright and clear for me. But if you start showing muddy reds next to muddy greens, I'm in real trouble!

Anyway, my working hypothesis is still that your patterns are illusory - but I remain open to the possibility I have that wrong.

wow, earlier in the thread I cheekily asked you if you knew any pilots so sincere apologies for that anyway.

this is interesting because it is quite well known that people who come from highly technical backgrounds often make very poor traders, people like scientists, engineers, who are used to working with binary options, ie yes/no and high levels of precision are always trying to be too precise about every little thing, and especially if as usual they are trying to trade from rearwards facing trading indicators.

highly intelligent people also often also tend to be detached and not very in touch with their emotions and so will be entirely unready for what trading and losing will do to them.

I think the reason that I can see this (even though I have an HND in Building Engineering Services from back in my early 20's) is because I have developed more of a hacker mindset to problem solving due to spending the last 8 years in close observation of another black box algo (Google) which is quite similar, in that we can never know how it works exactly, but we can very clearly observe it's behaviour to certain inputs over time.

back in 2006-2009 I put similar effort into understanding "if I do this, this happens" and am now (still, trying to reduce this) in overall SEO control of (too) many client sites, the highest of which is now turning over £2.7m per month, with £1.6m of that as a direct result of my part in things (SEO & PPC)

so whilst I know everybody loves to hate on the silly goldbug and his CTs, I also think most of you probably underestimate who you are actually dealing with, intellectually speaking, that is.

and staying with the Google comparison for a little while, because after all, Google is just another market, isn't it? it's actually a live, calculated on-the-fly auction for advertising services, to the biggest public market in the world in fact?

so obviously, like any market, wherever there is money to be earned (ie high paying keyword phrases) there will be money invested (SEO & PPC) into converting some of that potential into sales.

and obviously, the more money available to be earned, the higher the competition to rank for those keywords, so the more money you have to spend to chase them.. etc etc?

so like, in a phrase like "car insurance" where the earnings can be phenomenal, some companies have monthly budgets of $20 or even $50k, because the more the payout, the more the big boys are interested in playing. all make sense?

so given that Forex is a $5 trillion per day market, would it not make sense to assume there is a HUGE corporate banking spend and ongoing effort devoted to winning at this?

I think so, and I am actually quite qualified to judge, as it turns out.

Eddie, PM sent - screenshot inbound of figures stated above.

ps I listened to your podcasts, interesting, thanks.

 

[kevsta]

and look what not being able to concentrate fully does, I've ONLY gone and missed another Stolper

Trade Update: Close Short GBP/NOK tactical trade recommendation for a potential loss

On June 27 we recommended going short GBP/NOK after the NOK weakened sharply following the Norges Bank meeting on June 20. At the time, even though Norges Bank showed some concern over the weaker pace of activity in Norway, we thought the weakening in the NOK was an overshoot. However, weaker-than-expected data out of Norway – especially the weak Q2 GDP reading earlier this week – have pushed the NOK weaker, while the recent run of better-than-expected UK data have also pushed the GBP stronger. This Wednesday (August 21) we went through our stop on this recommendation of 9.46 and close it for a potential loss of 3.4%.

GBPNOK there's one I havent looked at yet, lets see how this played out for him shall we?

few minutes later, these pushes are drawn quickly at big scale and so could be better on the 3 down probably, but whatever, it went down, in 3 pushes as usual.

seriously, if you had to, who would you rather have trading your money, me or this clown with that nonsense analysis and no clue when to get out because your trade has run?

and in fact so just going long when he shorted would first have run upwards to his stoploss area, which I think must have been wider at the time. and why on earth was it not following the trade down to lock in profits. incompetence.. or..? what exactly.

so a straight immediate fade the stolper was an immediate small win. obviously it then ran 3 downwards so if you didnt take the profit at his stoploss level it would have run back and got you at zero

 

[kevsta]

and look what not being able to concentrate fully does, I've ONLY gone and missed another Stolper

GBPNOK there's one I havent looked at yet, lets see how this played out for him shall we?

few minutes later, these pushes are drawn quickly at big scale and so could be better on the 3 down probably, but whatever, it went down, in 3 pushes as usual.

[qimg]http://clip2net.com/clip/m0/1377343573-clip-44kb.png[/qimg]

seriously, if you had to, who would you rather have trading your money, me or this clown with that nonsense analysis and no clue when to get out because your trade has run?

and in fact so just going long when he shorted would first have run upwards to his stoploss area, which I think must have been wider at the time. and why on earth was it not following the trade down to lock in profits. incompetence.. or..? what exactly.

so a straight immediate fade the stolper was an immediate small win. obviously it then ran 3 downwards so if you didnt take the profit at his stoploss level it would have run back and got you at zero

ha, that is all so horribly wrong, please disregard all trade analysis in this post, I am an entire year out told you it was done quickly. to be fair, Stopler probably knows what year it is, but I doubt he had such a heavy night as me lastnight.

T3h correct.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

The black "down push" lines in the first post #451 chart are totally subjective and arbitrary.

I see two separate pushes combined into one, and one push arbitrarily split in the middle to become two.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

So kevsta is playing with pretend money, refuses to share any of his actual results (if he has any) because they may be down (whatever he calls being down), and simply posts chart after chart of his after-the-fact analyses where he tries to demonstrate that he foresaw all these movements, but he can't actually forerecast anything with any accuracy significantly above chance.

Did I miss anything?

Nope.

 

[kevsta]

The black "down push" lines in the first post #451 chart are totally subjective and arbitrary.

I see two separate pushes combined into one, and one push arbitrarily split in the middle to become two.

haha, wasn't that what I said? was drawn at massive timescale and so prob not quite right? see I'm even pre-empting your objections now.

here it is up close, and its perfectly valid, I put the pushes on the exact lines and not over them.

the yellow area is not counted as a push, because it then subsequently retraces all the way back to where it started from and did not shift the zone permanently until it then came down again.

up and down range movement is not a push, not until it's pushed away and stayed away.

also the time factor for a push, is 1-2 periods, in whatever timescale you are looking at, do you see any pushes that take longer than that?

 

[Scopedog]

the yellow area is not counted as a push, because it then subsequently retraces all the way back to where it started from and did not shift the zone permanently until it then came down again.

Isn't this exactly the problem? If you had been making trading decisions at the time you would have bought or sold mistakenly based on this illusion because you didn't know it would "[retrace] all the way back to where it started from". If you were actually investing real money you'd be destined to have this happen often enough over the long term that your net gain would probably never be above average and would probably actually be below average or a loss just like it is for most people who gamble.

 

[kevsta]

Hi and thanks for asking a related question, to start with

Isn't this exactly the problem? If you had been making trading decisions at the time you would have bought or sold mistakenly based on this illusion because you didn't know it would "[retrace] all the way back to where it started from".

ok, please do not misunderstand me, I, nor nobody can obviously predict every single move the market makes, however in general markets do tend to move like this, unless they are all static and waiting for an announcement, but when it comes, the trends then run like this again.

and yes, if you do not have a reasonable idea of which way it's all going, you are exactly right.

But looking at the valid system entries here, (a stoprun through a high probability (dotted red horizontal) line, in the opposite direction to where we expect the next push to go..? ..if you were the perfect cyclical game player and hit every single one of these at the yellow arrow, only the pink one came back (having already been into profit, that my tranched entry approach would have banked some of) and at that point, the stoploss comes to zero, and it it bounces back and takes me out at zero. and remember, a zero is up to half a win in trading, not zero at all, and there's the liklihood of actually having banked 2:1 off the biggest position slice before the other 2 got hit at zero anyway?

but because I am still looking for the next push down, when we once again stoprun the same line, I take the same trade again, and this time it runs?

not SO bad?

If you were actually investing real money you'd be destined to have this happen often enough over the long term that your net gain would probably never be above average and would probably actually be below average or a loss just like it is for most people who gamble.

it's a possibility, only time will tell amigo. I think you are wrong, and I think it more so every day, but then I am here doing it, and nobody else is.

and is a game of strategy and probability really gambling? no more than pacman for money anyway

 

[Fast Eddie B]

the yellow area is not counted as a push, because it then subsequently retraces all the way back to where it started from and did not shift the zone permanently until it then came down again.

up and down range movement is not a push, not until it's pushed away and stayed away.

I'm with Scopedog on this.

If a push can only be determined post hoc, then how does it have predictive value?

 

[Fast Eddie B]

and remember, a zero is up to half a win in trading, not zero at all, and there's the liklihood of actually having banked 2:1 off the biggest position slice before the other 2 got hit at zero anyway?

Translation, please?

 

[kevsta]

somebody asked me to define pushes and daily range, and I replied that the ADR levels do a pretty good job at daily level. here's an example, I dont trade this much because it moves differently to EURUSD & GBPUSD and the ranges and maths are different, but i watch it because it's movement and likely next turns affect which of EURUSD or GBPUSD is the better trade at the time (if they both set up together, which is quite often)

it's almost like, somebody is given a daily and weekly range limits or something, maybe by the BIS? (closest thing Forex marketmakers have to a regulator)

that spike there was impossible to survive if you had recently shorted. robbed, and then the train goes without you.