Arepo's Detailed Price Analysis and Projections

[arepo]

If a "trading system" works, then it stands to reason that it can only be known to a few participants.  i.e If a majority "know it" then it cannot work.
Absorb other techniques and build your own.

I'm well aware of this and is the only reason i published my price report to a small number of traders. otherwise i would have done a public bounty, but you and i both know that it would be self-defeating in that case.

as for your other points, i tend to agree

--arepo

[1714790730]

1714790730

[1714790730]

1714790730

[David M]

I'm well aware of this and is the only reason i published my price report to a small number of traders. otherwise i would have made a public bounty, but you and i both know that it would be self-defeating in that case.
--arepo

I really appreciate that yourself and others post trading methodologies on the forum.   

Before the Internet (and to a lesser extent today), "professionals" charge thousands for the privilege of "learning to trade".

[ruski]

it's been about an hour since this call. let us consider this an experiment, or a 'test' of the fractal hypothesis. of the small-scale triangles, this 'weak' pennant is one of the more robust ones i've observed. therefore, i'm confident that we'll see a breakout. 2 hours and counting.

So, it's been 3 hours, can we call it yet?

Before the Internet (and to a lesser extent today), "professionals" charge thousands for the privilege of "learning to trade".

They still do. Those bastardly universities.

[David M]

They still do. Those bastardly universities.

Those are not the courses I am talking about.

[ruski]

They still do. Those bastardly universities.

Those are not the courses I am talking about.

I know, just having a laugh.

[arepo]

it's been about an hour since this call. let us consider this an experiment, or a 'test' of the fractal hypothesis. of the small-scale triangles, this 'weak' pennant is one of the more robust ones i've observed. therefore, i'm confident that we'll see a breakout. 2 hours and counting.

So, it's been 3 hours, can we call it yet?

looks like a beartrap breakout. a little late. we'll move up next hourly candle.

update 9:

-===-



-===-

-triangle bounds in white
-moving support in yellow
-decreasing volume in blue
-price projection in grey

this is my best guess. if this doesn't occur, then the triangle is invalidated, indeed.

we could also simply move down. we just need the high volume to substantiate my earlier claim.

[arepo]

we could also simply move down. we just need the high volume to substantiate my earlier claim.

[arepo]

who's watching this intense candle battle? bulls vs bears, who will win? winner picks the direction of the next move....

[Frozenlock]

I'm watching. That would be a nice timing for a DDOS. 

[dandirk]

I will be watching for a bit too... Though for some reason, nothing happens during this time, then when I wake up I missed something!

[arepo]

I will be watching for a bit too... Though for some reason, nothing happens during this time, then when I wake up I missed something!

don't worry, something's about to happen this time.

my breakout-time-estimate was about 100% off, but i can live with that. i'm more confident now than before that this is a robust triangle -- check out the hourly candle view, very orderly. it seems i estimated the lower bound of the triangle a little too high (i thought the long tails at the base were outliers, but they were actually following a moving support that didn't get touched again until the beartrap just this past hour [yellow line in fig 9]). this is what caused me to underestimate the timescale.

figure in update 9 still my best projection. let the bulls run.

--arepo

[arepo]

update 10:

remember where we are in the model? this is why i believe fig 9 is correct:

-===-



-===-

so far, so consistent.

--arepo

[ruski]

It's just trending sideways. It could continue to do so for days. (Or external influences could attack it again, of course.) Nothing to see here IMO. Bought and holding.

[ruski]

don't worry, something's about to happen this time.

This is what happens when you confuse mid-term chart patterns for ultra short-term.

[arepo]

don't worry, something's about to happen this time.

haha great pic, i had a good laugh

as for the test, i realize that it was pretty unscientific of me to 'readjust' the breakout time after the first call -- what i ought to have done was provide error bars for the time in the first place -- which inspired me to measure triangles with more statistical rigor. geometric measurements clearly are not enough. what properties tend to lead to successful breakouts? what properties tend to lead to unsuccessful breakouts? and what properties lead to no breakouts at all, and are simply other patterns or just noise masquerading as triangles?

as for the one i was looking at last night,



the 'breakout attempt' occurred at around 5:00 am EST, so, as i calculated before, about 100%200% error. however, it failed -- i suspect because of low volume.

however, the triangle itself is still very robust, and the price did not begin trending sideways until after 5 am. unfortunately, being able to identify triangles is useless until i learn how to measure them more precisely

regardless, i appreciate the constructive criticism hopefully i will return with an improved model. i have some work to do.

--arepo

[ElectricMucus]

regardless, i appreciate the constructive criticism hopefully i will return with an improved model. i have some work to do.

Stop using triangles. I would suggest using dochian channels.
For example



We have a sma crossover which can lead to a correction if the channel is moved downwards. It's pretty laggy but not as error prone.

Ok it did that, lets see if it works, if it does it should reach next support.

[arepo]

regardless, i appreciate the constructive criticism hopefully i will return with an improved model. i have some work to do.

Stop using triangles. I would suggest using dochian channels.

well i'm certainly not only using triangles

and yes, the crossover you identified seems to be spot on. it does seem like we're going to slide down to the next support...

[zby]

don't worry, something's about to happen this time.

haha great pic, i had a good laugh

as for the test, i realize that it was pretty unscientific of me to 'readjust' the breakout time after the first call -- what i ought to have done was provide error bars for the time in the first place -- which inspired me to measure triangles with more statistical rigor. geometric measurements clearly are not enough. what properties tend to lead to successful breakouts? what properties tend to lead to unsuccessful breakouts? and what properties lead to no breakouts at all, and are simply other patterns or just noise masquerading as triangles?

as for the one i was looking at last night,



the 'breakout attempt' occurred at around 5:00 am EST, so, as i calculated before, about 100%200% error. however, it failed -- i suspect because of low volume.

however, the triangle itself is still very robust, and the price did not begin trending sideways until after 5 am. unfortunately, being able to identify triangles is useless until i learn how to measure them more precisely

regardless, i appreciate the constructive criticism hopefully i will return with an improved model. i have some work to do.

--arepo

Was it really triangle - it looked like a wedge (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/wedge.asp) for me (and I was selling).

[arepo]

Was it really triangle - it looked like a wedge (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/wedge.asp) for me (and I was selling).

yes, it was a wedge, that is, it did not exhibit lower highs and higher lows, but higher lows and higher highs.

since both of these patterns are associated with large volume breakouts, i tend to look at them as two manifestations of the same underlying behavior. the idea of the price function behaving like a dampened oscillator (sine function with decreasing amplitude), is associated with consolidation. forgive me for using the word 'triangle' too liberally.

[zby]

Was it really triangle - it looked like a wedge (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/wedge.asp) for me (and I was selling).

yes, it was a wedge, that is, it did not exhibit lower highs and higher lows, but higher lows and higher highs.

since both of these patterns are associated with large volume breakouts, i tend to look at them as two manifestations of the same underlying behavior. the idea of the price function behaving like a dampened oscillator (sine function with decreasing amplitude), is associated with consolidation. forgive me for using the word 'triangle' too liberally.

I really only repeat what I read here and on some reference materials like investopedia - but my understanding is that wedge was susceptible to trend change - that is when it was going up - then it was probable that when it breaks it will go down, with triangles I don't see similar remarks on investopedia.