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)
There are, of course, newer editions, but this is only 32c used, and formulas are formulas. Before buying something newer and more expensive, this will at least give you an idea of whether or not this is what you're looking for.
From the AMT point of view the second trade was taken in the MP of the TR, the “good” trade that accomplished the requirements regarding to the SLA and AMT was the first one, which by the way was successful because was the point of beginning of downtrend that later turned into a TC, notwithstanding the trade was discarded prematurely.
Sorry to contradict, but there are no trend channels here. But even if there were, I encourage those who are interested in this to keep it simple and avoid looking for trend channels in these micro environments, much less using them to trigger trades.
The first trade works because it's the first retracement after a breakout. The second one doesn't because it's too late.
In any event, the gain from the first would more or less balance out the loss from the second. The more important choice was to stop.
Edit: As long as we're on the subject, I should use this opportunity to point out that if the first entry is taken, I presume at or about 97, it needn't be exited until the supply line is broken, I presume at or about 93, resulting in a 4pt gain. If one invokes the Rule of Preclusion, the second trade would not be entered at all. Otherwise, there would be no gain but rather a 4pt loss.
If one then focuses on price rather than his loss (or in the event he entered at the first retracement, his profitable exit), he sees that price failed to reach the last swing high. This can be used as a justification for entering a potential continuation trade. This would be pretty much a wash. But those are the breaks. That it's a wash provides information (see The Price of Admission).
This one is a gem - "Reducing risk begins with taking a risk before we know enough to make it safe."
Now I know that this is what I did on my last two trades which were profitable and I was happy and satisfied with my execution. I entered very near to the low of a retracement (hence reducing my risk - this was prompted by one of your posts stating something like - we can do away with the confusion of when to know that the retracement is over and risk missing the upmove by risking a defined gap from the recent low).
Thanks as always for your guidance and support.
You don't know how many lives you are changing here and I mean it.
I want to let you and all know that so far i.e. since I started to take interest in trading I have not found anyone who came even close (in terms of knowledge and deciphering the market) to the shadow of Gurudev. No one even seems to think in these terms that we all are doing here and I feel this is some sort of evolution/wisdom being shared here.
I should point out again in case I haven't made it clear that this is a paraphrase from Mamis. Virtually everything I know about risk I learned from Mamis. In fact, along with Trading in the Zone, The Nature of Risk is one of the only two books I currently recommend.
Similarly, the SLA is firmly rooted in Wyckoff. It didn't just come to me in a dream.