Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
One of the other things that the CD Intercept to D trade does, is that it forces verification and validation of Standard Harmonic Patterns. Either the CD Intercept to D will rise to its target level, or it will evolve into an AB=CD pattern, where essentially the old XA leg becomes the AB leg and the old BC leg becomes the CD leg.
Note: Using 61.8 for point B (retracement of the XA leg) seems to establish the above rule of thumb fairly firmly.
So, if I know the ratios of the initial Harmonic Pattern and I know that AB=CD calls for CD to extend to 127 to 161 of BC, then all I need to do is make sure that place a minimum range requirement on the original XA leg, in order to limit risk on the CD Intercept to D failure and to increase the probability for Stop & Reverse to BE recovery.
It is pretty simple and its a pretty cool way to do the Harmonics, when you stop to think about it.
So this trade set up to D was off a Standard Harmonic ? (a Gartley or Crab etc..still getting my head around these)
There is no Falcon.?
To see if I'm understanding, would there have been a Non-Conforming Falcon ?
JetTrader
I appreciate the time you take to reply and the detail.
Thanks for the clarification re: annotating the Long and Short Trajectories.
Leaving aside the Alphas for the moment.
I'm getting lost with the terminology.
As I understand things:
1. TCD Falcon is created via the 2 x TCD Trajectories.(one long trajectory and one short trajectory)
deriving from your High / Low over 2 consecutive (higher time frame) H1 bars.
2. You need to wait for the close of the 2nd H1 bar in order to know what the 2 x TCD Trajectories are.?
In other words the shape and direction of the Falcon
3. You can then trade the TCD Falcon on the open of H1 bar 3 in the direction towards the tail.
4. Are you saying that the trajectories High/Low subtraction calculation, your Delta, is also giving you a potential trade target?
and if so, that target would be from the open of H1 bar 3 ?
I hope you don't mind the questions.
Many thx
(Attached are 2 previous charts I posted all in one.
NT has marked the time, far right dotted vertical line as 18:00 but it is actually 17:00)
All three charts look correct to my eye. A slam dunk the first time through.
I spent all day running Standard Harmonic Patterns on the M1. It got hot and heavy for a while, but as the NYSE closes up shop, things tapered off into a slow descent downward for the EURUSD. But an hour or two before 0000 GMT, smaller Standard Harmonics structures started forming again.
Note the tight Tail Feather formation on your Conforming TCD Falcon and the huge wingspan. Looks like a Falcon coming in for a landing to me, where he flares his wings just before touch-down. I'm still learning some things about Falcon's, so I am not yet a Falcon Trainer.
Technically, that's what got my last two Falcons shot down. Remember, I'm in discovery as well. I've seen many instances where prior to the current Time Delimiter, the Falcon takes flight. Remember you can search for Falcon's using any Time Delimiter - you can search for 38 Minute Falcons while at the same time searching for Standard Harmonics on the M1 chart if you wanted to. In that example, Time Delimiter would be 19 Minutes. It is up to your imagination and and the level of research you want to put into it. Right now, until I develop more forward looking data, I'm doing all Harmonic searches on the M1 and using H1 Time Delimiters for the Falcons.
I need to have a reason to continue this research, so I build data in the lower time-frames for concept proofing. Then I look to explore other time-frames. In the currency markets, the behavior of each pair, can be seen more easily (to my eye) in the M1 time-frame. So, that's where I develop most of my ideas. If it happens on M1, then its happening elsewhere with a larger event horizon. Also, M1 gives you more reps. You see the same patterns occurring on a more repetitious basis. It speeds up the research. You can extrapolate to larger time-frames later.
So, the entry into the Falcon can be adjusted if you like. Just as long as it is clear that the Falcon exists before the end of the second bar that contains it. Sometimes the Falcon launches first, sometimes he launches after the Harmonic (if there is one coinciding with the Falcon) and at other times, he fails to launch. I'm trying to understand WHY.
I'm all about the WHY. I want to know why things happen the way they do. I don't believe in luck and the only guess that I'm "ok" with making is an educated guess. I think there is causation for everything in life.
That's the current rule. Of course, it is subject to change or edits the more I learn about Harmonics and the relationship (if any) to the Falcon. One of the interesting things that I noted was that one wing of the Non-Conforming Falcons tends to end up evolving into the AB leg of the AB=CD pattern. It is not really ground breaking information when you stop think about what the TCD looks like. TCDs by definition contain all price behavior for all bars in existence. There is no price action outside of the TCD. That's why you obtain a very cool indicator when you start building the historical TCDs and produce the TCD Averages.
There are essentially three (3) of them:
Strategic TCD
Tactical TCD
Real-Time TCD
I won't get into them now, because they are outside the scope (for now) of this particular thread. Right now, I've only been discussing the singular/static TCD and only because it forms the body of the Falcon. Or, said another way, the Falcon and the static TCD are one and the same. But, when you get to the three (3) dynamic (a custom moving average) TCDs, that's a different animal for a different purpose.
I've built a Targeting Package inside the trading system. Dynamic TCD values are used along with 30 additional inputs to the Targeting Package. I use TCD Fibonacci Ratios and a host of other inputs that produce the Trade Profile, which contains:
Targeting is a huge subject. No single bar can help me set a target. The Targeting Package inside the trading system is a "system" in and of itself - its a huge module with its own ranking system. In this particular phase of study, I really don't have a target. Targets are strange creatures and they require a ton of good logic. I won't be doing any target algorithms on Standard Harmonics and Falcons anytime soon.
To understand where you target should be in FX, you really do need to understand your Signal and its capacity to deliver. Anything else is flat out guess work. It took me years to learn that single lesson. Build the system or methodology first, then go back and build the logic for targeting. And, then be prepared to spend a lot of time finding the sweet spot. This is why every test trade I do, collects both MFE and MAE data. That data will become invaluable down the road when it comes time to establish realistic targets.
I'm only working on two (2) entry types. On the Standard Harmonic, I'm testing the CD Intercept to D, and the D to P (where, P = some nearby Fibonacci projection). On the TCD Falcon, I'm testing the Open of the current bar [0] (which is the Close of bar [1]). Because the Harmonics have a point "D," I'll be using that for the Limit level when entering on the CD Intercept to D. For the Falcon, I'll be using its TCD intersection (where both TCDs crossed each other previously).
These are all jello targets - there is no real substantive logic behind them. That can only be done with a real understanding of the overall capacity of the Signals used and that's just not what this phase of research is all about. So, pick a target - any target but be sure to measure and collect MFE/MAE data regardless of which target you use.
**********************
P.S.
I have no idea how you guys are getting such clean looking pics onto this forum. I can't seem to obtain the same clarity in my pics. I'm not sure if Tinypic is the problem or not, but all my pics have far lower resolution that most posted here.
Lets see how this goes.
Not withsatnding the stop and reverse aspect.
C to D, ( Gartley retracement levels are new to me so apologies if they are not quite on the mark)
PS: Not getting the Gartley numbers right, sorry.
see 3 rd chart magenta dashed lines to D (786 retracement ?)
Attached is a last chart I did for today, just to round it off.
I didn't mean to interupt your thread with posting my charts, especially as I'm new to these "winged" patterns.
I guess all I'm doing here is basic Gartley patterns.
It's not taking on board your level of sophistication with calculations.
I would be interested in seeing if any understandong of if/when a D holds or is extended.
I understand and appreciate your comments regards the many combinations of time deliniters.
In the first pic, the Left Tail Feather is to far forward. It should be in the 6:00 hour because you are using the 1 hr time delimiter to locate your Falcon, which means your Falcon should be spread over 2 hours total time. So, left wingtip and left tail feather should be located in the first hour (bar [2]) with the right wingtip and right tail feather located in the second hour (bar [1]), after completion.
In the first pic, I also noticed good coincidence between the Falcon and the Harmonic. You can see why I like the CD Intercept to D, here. When the coincidence is tight in Time, the CD leg seems to have a good run and puts you in position to reverse on D with pips already booked. If CD Intercept to D fails, then Stop & Reverse at C for recovery.
The theory here is predicated on the idea that no market can contract forever. So, when CD Intercept to D fails, it provides you with a built-in "market contraction" indicator of sort. Or, thought of another way, an early warning indication of impending market expansion. That "C for Recovery" entry point into the reversal from CD Intercept to D, also provides a fairly low risk trade profile.
If you go back and take a look at most CD legs, often times you will see that they similar in size to the move you get off the D entry and sometimes even larger - significantly larger. So, if you can find a low risk way to jump C early and stay vigilant on the possibility of it failing, it makes trading the D less riskier.
I call it the CD Intercept, because you are intercepting the CD leg before D materializes. Of course, the average Harmonics trader would consider this approach nuts and that is precisely why I will try to optimize this type of trade.
I'm also working on a new profile that I'm calling the: BC Intercept to C with Scaling. This will essentially be an intercept of the BC leg using a multi-scale-in entry to point C, solidifying all positions by the time C solidifies. If C does not hold and the Harmonic goes invalid by breaking the price level at 'A', then there are a number of different approaches that I can use to reach break-even, or even net a smaller profit on the set-up. I'm still working on this approach, so I won't disclose it at this point.