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)
I to am studying Wyckoff, on my own and I have read many books on the subject. I am now reviewing a Book by David Weiss called "Trades about to Happen." I read the book last year but I really did not understand it, it wasn't until I started learning other methods of trading that Wycloff material started to come to me. So I opened David Weiss's book again for review. I also watched a Big Mike video on Wyckoff and it started to make more since. But I am starting to see that I am having a different way of looking at Wyckoff than what is shown on charts and print material. Like shortening of the thrust. In David's book he says that shortening of the thrust is measured as the distance between the highs and lows of a trend and that shortening the distance is a way of determining the thrust and the turning point of the trend. In shortening of the thrust if the supply line is touched but the demand line is not (bars not reaching the demand line) in an uptrend would this just be a change in behavior or something else. As demand is now higher than it was previously.
One of the things I learned in Gary Dayton's chart reading course was to avoid the news. Not news reports coming out that could affect day trading, but news about companies that may affect ones trading decisions.
Morgan Stanley reported a larger quarterly profit. I was curious to see what the stock had been doing and what it is not doing after the report. It's interesting to me that there has been a shortening of the upward thrust and when price exceeded the prior high it has sold off and is currently on the lows. I don't know if MS will close on the lows, or if it will continue to move higher or have a reversal, but I do find it's current behavior interesting and it will be interesting to see how the stock performs going forward.
If you were to ask me the question "do professionals use positive news to wrong foot the public?" I would answer yes, they do.
The chart reference included with the text above(posted by DrGary on page 5) is a brilliant example of bearish price structure, i'd call it text book. It's an excellent reference point.
I've noticed with these types of discretionary setups, people are often guilty of "Creating" low quality formations that manifest losing trades. You shouldn't have to create anything, valid formations will create themselves. A valid setup/formation should be something you have specifically identified the parameters of, and is what you class as a A+ formation( something that makes you the most amount of money). When you get to this point, then it's far less discretionary and much more mechanical. If something in a potential setup doesn't add up, and you start trying to rationalize it, so you can still call it an A+ setup, then you're guilty of "creating" or curve fitting . You should only be looking to trade A+ setups with near perfect formations that you have no question about taking, since you've identify that specific formation as your A+ setup. If you end up 2nd guessing yourself then something is usually wrong- even if the trade goes in your favor.
Also, if you're only trading the ES/NQ then you can hardly expect to see quality formations every day, where as someone who trades stocks & various futures markets might have a greater chance of identifying quality setups, they'll also have a greater perspective of how formations change depending on the market/ticker/timeframe you trade.
I was actually referring to this chart here, posted by Dr Gary on page 5.
This for me is a dream example of an intra day bear setup, however my interpretation of it is different than Dr Garry's. For me price breaking the D low( on good volume) is a key component because in the one bar/ thrust it also breaks all other key levels marked B( where I've added to the chart an additional support/ resistance line), which should of acted as support if price was still moving up. Price then consolidates around the swing low of B, on low volume, and fails to find enough strength to even 'touch' the D low( this creates a small gap, and gaps often mean there's alot more left in the move). Price then falls further on heavy volume, and rallies back on small volume to find Resistance at B, and still under the previous swing high(3), which keeps the pattern of lower highs, and lower lows in tact. I guess you could almost call this a type of inverted spring( Although i wouldn't)
Anyway i just though i'd point this chart out, since it's the kind of structure i'm always looking for on an intra day basis.
I do like the spring setups, however they're very open to interpretation and shouldn't just be based on one time frame. I also feel you really need a good understanding of how each ticker trades before you take them. I think people who trade them with success have usually created their own interpretation/ contextual bias, based on what works for them. What I like most about these types of setups is the risk vs reward. Since you're using good trade location, you can often get away with using very tight stops above/ below key reference points.
...Just to add to my earlier post about people "creating" poor setups. I think it's very dangerous to be alerted to a particular ticker for some fundamental/ news related reason, and then start looking for spring setups etc when you already have a bias towards the direction you think price is heading. This is destined for disaster IMO.
Just to be clear about something. I never said I was looking for a setup based on news or fundamentals. I said I had learned from Dr Gary to be cautious about news and to basically ignore it. When I saw the headline regarding earnings for MS I thought it would be interesting to look at the chart as an experiment. I annotated the chart based on what I saw, but never said there was a setup.
Fair enough David, I wasn't trying to criticize what you were doing. I like the charts you've posted btw, and hope you keep posting more.
What I described was really just a general observation I've noticed when it comes to identifying setups. Whenever you look at a chart once you already have some type of fundamental bias, then it's so much easier for that bias to manifest itself in the way you interpret the chart, maybe without you even knowing. Just something to think about anyway...