M TTT M

Wondering a bit about the Circles of Conflict. Seems major when reading materials from TH Murrey site but seldom appearing on anything to do with forex. I think maybe xard777 did show them way back, and he seems well respected. Xcalibur wrote, "Circles of Conflict are great future zones of potential action." Perhaps this related more specifically to higher TFs.

Curious about your thoughts, though.

In the beginning I sense one should focus on -1,0,1 as long only (obviously) and +1,8,7 for shorts perhaps adding price entering at 3/8 with a target around 5/8 (and vice versa). Anything else you would suggest focusing on . . . ?

I think I need to take things one trade at a time as I get grounded in MML working up to TS order 1 (3 pair).

Spent time looking especially at H4 over the weekend, off TF here I understand, but examining movement from typically OB or OS levels mentioned above. Pretty consistent across a variety of pairs it seems. Certainly, working in MTF seems pretty essential here so as not to get a big surprise on a lower TF.

I certainly don't get too involved here with the Circles of Conflict mainly due to the following:

a) high level of dicretion involved
b) no 'real' MT4 drawing solution for the CofC and
c) no update as to the yearly restart date which occurs in early October YoY.

Ofcourse getting hold of the yearly Oct start date is only a matter of viewing a current Murrey chart but then there is the issue of either sourcing an MT4 or MT5 indicator that can accurately draw the Circle of Conflicts or coding it myself.

Personally I would not want to use MT4 for the drawing platform, there are far far better choices out there.

The other issue is if I do code it up on a very different platform I will have a string of requests asking for an MT4 version.
In any case I really am unsure as to the value of these CofC's and the coding exercise is likely to be a little time consuming and time is tied up in other trading responsibilities and software development projects at this stage.

Another option is to become a Murrey subscriber and get the charts as per their software (I am not recommending this by the way).
Please do your own due diligence in this space .... highly recommend that each trader is very thorough in their choice.

OAPDave has such a subscription (I do not).

So in short what I use is the MML indicator initially coded by Vladislav Goshkov (circa 2004) and modify the code to suit my purposes such as additional functionality, parameters, setting a fixed start date, over-riding the MML line calculations so I can set static High and Low price levels etc.

I only use the MML levels from that indicator without any reference to the Circles of Conflict.

There are a few coders who have given the Circle of Conflict an MT4 attempt but I'm not sure any were successful, perhaps some advanced quite well only to resort to a private development (who knows ?).

MML Entry Zones:

I apply the upper and lower extreme zones for potential entries as you are well aware.

But it also makes good sense to actually look for setups at the 7/8-8/8 and 0/8-1/8 zones since the MML Grid is actually from 0/8 to 8/8.

The extreme zones comprised of 2 octives above and below those mentioned above is simply my approach to get into a reversal type setup at a better price but everything here is highly relative, the P value applied and the TF its used on are all relative.

What you are suggesting with MTF approach is a solid logical idea and this has been referred too in this thread as well as a few others.

In fact I also use the MML Grid approach as part of the Quad Candle System (D1 priority) but have taken some shorter term cycles on say an M15 TF that are within say 1 to 2 octives of the D1 chart which equates to faster gains over a smaller price range (LTF mated to HTF).

I would suggest trading between 1 to 2 octives (HTF) using a lower TF chart so what you could do is open a D1 with P=64, locate a zone of interest of 1 to 2 octives, note the upper and lower price boundaries and then step down to any LTF chart and trade within these 2 levels.

You will have to find the LTF MML settings that align with the HTF chart settings but this is not that difficult, some trial and error approach will get you there or simply realize how many bars a 64 day period eqautes to on the lower TF of your choice.

For example, a full day of data on the M1 TF is 1440 by 1 minute bars (2 days is 2880 etc etc).
Then if the TF is say M15 you will know how to find how mnay M15 bars make up 1 day of data ... 64 days will be elementary (__ * 64).

Or you can start with 86400 which is the number of seconds in a day and use this for the calculations.

M1 TF example:
86400 = number of seconds in 1 Day
60 = number of seconds in M1 bar

M1 bars (per 1Day) = 86400/60 = 1440.

M15 TF example:
86400 = secs in a day
60*15 = 900 = secs in an M15 bar

M15 bars (per 1Day) = 86400/900 = 96.

H1 TF example:
86400 = secs in a day
60*60 = 3600 = secs in an H1 bar

H1 bars (per 1Day) = 86400/3600 = 24. [Check: Does a day have 24 hours in it ... if yes then you know your calcs are right].

Similarly for all other TFs of interest.

In the MML indicator note the MMPeriod input parameter, apply values of 60 (or other values) and notice how the MML levels may change.

HTF MML trading is certainly a good way to go and you have mentioned a key observation here namely the consistency.

The MTTTM method has been a somewhat mechanical triangulated trading approach but it does not have to be.
It is up to the trader to experiment with other ideas and see what happens.

A great project would be for a trader/coder to develop an automated trading system mainly so that the MTTTM approach can be analyzed over any amount of data across any number of pairs.

Backtesting has its benefits and its drawbacks ofcourse so you must keep an open mind and realize that real market data is very likely to shift/skew the results perhaps more than a little but at least the analysis provides plenty of clues, the clues can lead to fewer losses in some cases and at the end of the day at least you will have some idea as to how likely the trading strategy is in surviving in the harsh real market.

I've already coded an MT5 EA which trades MTTTM and QCS over multiple pairs (9 currently with easy option to add in as mnay as you like).
Testing continues...........

If its a highly mechanical trading approach then ideally an EA should be coded so it can test multiple scenarios much much faster than a human ever could.

If its a discretionary trading approach then better the trader applies it by him/her self.

Good news though is that you can easily test out HTF MTTTM setups as I'm currently doing on the H1 TF but you can use H4 or D1 if that suits you better just understand that as the TF increases the applied lots will typically decrease based on your available Equity ofcourse.

Feel free to share your ideas and post your setups to this thread or the QCS thread (if its D1 trading).

Good trading,

Masterrmind.............

Hi guys, it saddens my to say that after all these years of trying to understand the workings of Murrey that I cannot recommend that anyone pays for a subscription or indeed part with any money for the End Of Day Software, Every year is the same and this year is no exception, as I type, still not had my licence renewal for the current year, obviously my current version does not now work, the so called back office is a complete shambles, the worst I have ever had to deal with, in fact no matter how many e-mails you send you just never get a reply.
p.s. Upset and disappointed ex Murrey user
OAPDave

Forest-Sea

I am working with "Murrey's" methodology since 1998. I tried to read on the web ALL what was written on this methodology (or related to).

In 20 years I never found something relative to the Circles of Conflict used for Analysis and / or Trading.

I am the only guy I know who posts on all his Excel charts "Circles of Conflict"

it is an old habit - the real question is : is it useful in a way or another for analysis, for trading ?

it is mainly descriptive of Price Action after the fact

You can describe Circles of Conflict as "Hard Zones" "Energy Zones" which can be attractive or repulsive according to the polarization (that you can not forecast before)

Visualization of Circles of Conflict

Parisboy, you are up there with the best of the best, so can I ask the question about the Murrey so called Start of the new 256 day Cycle ( October ?) is it real and important or just a marketing ploy

Dave I need to check in my archives what I have on the subject.

Anyway there is no logical relations between Murrey's birthday's date and Price Action . It is just pure megalomany of someone who ended up describing himself as the "new Gann" and even better than Gann

The division of Time in quarter is logical according to Gann methodology.

Basically the first research on the subject was linked with Commodities (Wheat, Soja, Cotton, Metals, etc) then the 4 Seasons influence (or not) then "Cycles"

Hence the same tools were used for industrial products and consequently average shares.

Experience showed me that you can use Gann tools with "success" (efficient operative results) :

- (Angles (Diagonal Lines),
- Circles of Conflict (Crossing of Horizontal and Vertical Lines)
- and MML's (Horizontal Gann Lines)

whatever your starting point is.

For example such tools work very well on the 30 DAX components even if Yahoo data begin most of the time 1st March 2000.

The Gann/Murrey system works also efficiently with "newborn" corporations for example Facebook , Twitter, Tesla etc

Many thanks for your reply

Forest-Sea

hereunder you will find what Tim Kruzel wrote on the "Circles of Conflict"

Circles of Conflict

The circles of conflict are a by product of the properties of the horizontal MML's that divide price and vertical time lines (VTL's) that divide time. MML's represent points of support and resistance. VTL's represent reversal points. Put it all together and the result is the "circles of conflict".

Consider a square in time divided into eight price intervals and eight time intervals. The five circles of conflict are centered on the 2/8 th's, 4/8 th's, and the 6/8 th's MML's and the 2/8 th's, 4/8 th's, and 6/8 th's VTL's. Recall that prices spend 40% of their time between the 3/8 th's and 5/8 th's MML's.

Recall also that the 2/8 th's, 4/8 th's, and 6/8 th's MML's represent strong points of support and resistance.

If we can assume that the 2/8 th's, 4/8 th's, and 6/8 th's VTL's represent strong points of reversal, we can expect that in slow trendless markets that prices will be deflected around the circles of conflict.

In a fast up or down market prices will move through the circles quickly since the price momentum exists to penetrate support and resistance lines.

The circles of conflict are an example of the value of a standard reference frame (square in time) in divining market action. This reference frame and its associated geometry and rules can be applied to all price-time scales in all markets.

Dave

hereunder some thoughts of Tim Kruzel on Time and on the Starting Date

Time

The term "square in time" has been used liberally throughout the prior discussions without any specific statements regarding time. All that has been addressed so far is the vertical price dimension of the square in time. This is justified since the process of identifying the MML's and MMI's requires a little more effort than the divisions of time.

The fact that less discussion has been devoted to the time dimension should not be interpreted to mean that the time dimension is any less important than the price dimension.

Time and price are equally important.

Time is divided up in a very reasonable (and practical manner). The year is broken into quarters of 64 trading days each. Note that 64 is a power of 2 (i.e. (2 x 2 x 2) x (2 x 2 x 2) = 8 x 8 = 64). An interval of 64 can easily be subdivided into half intervals. Note that 8 (the number of vertical intervals in the square in time) is also a power of 2 (i.e. (2 x 2 x 2) = 8).

Thus, the square in time can easily be scaled in both the price (vertical) and the time (horizontal) dimensions simply by multiplying or dividing by 2 (very clever).

Consider also that a year consists of four quarters. Four is also a power of 2. So, a square in time based upon a year long scale can also easily be subdivided.

The ability to subdivide the square in time gives the square in time the ability to evolve as an entity trades through time. The square in time acts as a reference frame (coordinate system) that can adjust itself as needed. As an entity reaches new high or low prices, the reference frame can be expanded by doubling the square in both the price and time dimensions. Alternatively, if one wishes to look at the price of an entity during some short time frame one can simply halve the square in both the price and time dimensions (resulting in a quarter square). This halving and doubling may be carried out to whatever degree is practical (i.e. Practical within the limits of how much price and time data may be subdivided. A daily chart can't be subdivided into intraday prices or time). Refer back to the description of the rectangular fractal at the beginning of this paper.

The argument for breaking the year into quarters intuitively makes sense. The business world (including mutual fund managers) is measured on a quarterly basis. Each of the four quarters roughly correspond to the four seasons of the year which drive weather and agriculture (as well as commodity contracts). Clearly humans are geared to a quarterly cycle.

Murrey resets the time = 0 point on an annual basis. This is done the first week of October and corresponds to the day of the U.S. Treasury's monthly and quarterly bond auctions (This year 10/8/97). Once the time = 0 point is set one may simply count off daily increments of 4, 8, 16, 32, or 64 days relative to the time = 0 point to set the desired square in time (or 256 days if one wants an annual chart).

At this point one should realize that specifying a time interval is critical to setting up the square in time. In the above examples that were used to illustrate the selection of MML's and MMI's the time frame was implied. All that was specified in the examples was the price range that the entity traded at. Naturally, one has to ask the question, "The price range it traded at during what time frame?". One will probably want to set up the square in time for annual and quarterly time frames. The quarterly square in time will probably be subdivided into a 16 day time frame for intermediate term trading.

One would need intraday data to set up an intraday square in time. The time coordinate of an intraday chart is simply divided into 4 or 8 uniform intervals. The intraday MML's and MMI's are then set up using the intraday trading range. If one is looking at a weekly chart then a quarter should consist of 13 weeks.

Another key use of the time dimension is estimating when a trend in price will reverse itself. The horizontal MML's of a square in time represent points of support and resistance in the price dimension. The vertical lines that divide the square in the time dimension represent likely trend reversal points. My own personal studies, done on the DJIA, showed that on average the DJIA has a turning point every 2.5 days. Since we know that the market does not move in a straight line we would expect to see frequent trend reversals.

Murrey uses the vertical time lines (1/8 th lines) in the square to signal trend reversals.

Fantastic in depth reply, its great to tap into your vast knowledge of all things connected to trading, thank you so much

Dave , for your information an old message from a former Murrey discussion group


If you are concerned about price levels they are unaffected by the start date. As for the time lines, you might be interested in the following which are portions of two messages from Bonnie Hill (her website is http://home.flash.net/~blhill/pages/murrey.html).

Bill

I need to give a little history of "Murrey Math".

"Murrey Math" is based on a course written by W D Gann. When Murrey put his mother into a rest home, he found the course when he cleaned out her house. He used this material as the basis for "Murrey Math".

In the early days, Murrey gave Gann credit for the material. As the years passed, Murrey has "forgotten" where the ideas came from :-) There are several ideas in the course which Murrey did NOT understand correctly. That is why some of the techniques seem great and some seem a little "strange".

The starting point for the 4th quarter is actually the midpoint between the Earth's perihelion and aphelion. This date is approximately October 2nd.
The date can be shifted due to trading days or lunar aspects (Full/New Moons, etc) which occur close to this date.

Murrey's "birthday, etc" is pure nonsense. If you have a copy of this particular Gann course you know EXACTLY where "Murrey Math" came from. I have "Murrey Math" charts which I drew over 10 years before I ever saw the "Murrey Math" manual :-)

Best wishes,

Bonnie Lee Hill

Dave,

you have to note that Bonnie Hill :

- does NOT indicate which "particular" Gann Course it is, where to find or buy it
- does NOT explain WHY the "starting point" should be at the beginning of October
- does not explain what are the "several ideas in the course which Murrey did NOT understand correctly."

Dave,

another post of my archives from a guy who obviously gave at that time a lot of thoughts on the subject "Start of the New Cycle"


I think the start date is important. FOM is just giving out some flack since nobody is recognizing the true elements of the discussion. Of course, if the start date is wrong, then it won't be very important, obviously. But, get it right and the results are quite impressive, enough so that it is worth the effort to set it
properly.

First, to counteract some of the FOM sarcasm recently: (FOM) was the abbreviation of a poster named Friend of Murrey, very aggressive towards the others and always bragging on how Murrey was a genius. Most guys suspected it was Murrey himself)

I. The Start Date DOES RESET every year in October.

II. The Start DATE IS IMPORTANT.

Check how many significant turns occur within +/-4 trading days of the start of any of the 64 bar frames.

III. It is not related to the first frost or Murrey's birthday

Although both may be close to the date, this is just fluff to conceal the true origin of the date.

I have been testing a proposed start date algorithm for a little while, and I think that it would explain Murrey's start dates for the most part. It may not be perfect, but certainly seems close. It also seems to agree with most of Murrey's nuggets of wisdom along the way.

Murrey Points to Keep in Mind:

1. It is related to the harvest moon somehow.

2. It is related to multiples of 4 trading days.

3. It should be in the first week of October each year.

4. Once set, the count remains fixed until the next October.

Note, Point #4 was the fooler because some earlier versions of Murrey's EOD program had some bugs related to the date which caused it to slide up or back 1 or 2 days at times, which clouded this issue, even though Murrey would state that the count did not adjust mid-year. But, close examination of Murrey's Trader's World articles shows that this date should not be changed once set until the next October.


Proposed Start Date Algorithm:

1. Take the first full moon which is on or after Sep 21 as the HARVEST MOON and denote that date as the anchor for the count.

2. If the full moon occurs earlier than 12:45 ET, then back up 1 calendar day and call that the anchor.

Note, that +8 trading days from this anchor date must be October 1st or later. If the September full moon is not within +8 trading days, you must switch to the October full moon as the anchor.

3. In cases of weekend anchor dates, ALWAYS round BACK not FORWARDS.

The trading frame dates tend to creep larger over the year, since there are only 252-253 trading days a year, but 256 trading dates in 4 64-bar frames. So, we would always want to round back, not forwards, since the tendency would be to move farther ahead of the actual year, not behind it.

3. If the anchor date is in September, then count either +4 trading days or +8 trading days until reaching a date in October. This date then becomes the year's start date.

4. If the anchor date is in October, then count either 0 trading days, -4 trading days, or -8 trading days until reaching a date which is October 7 or earlier.

Examples:

1. 2002-2003 Start Date:

Full Moon = Sept. 21 09:59 ET. Because it is before 12:45 ET, back up 1 calendar day. Anchor Date = Sept. 20, 2002. Add 8 trading days = Oct. 2, 2002 ( Murrey Math Start Date ).

2. 2001-2002 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 2 09:49 ET. Because it is before 12:45 ET, back up 1 calendar day. Anchor Date = Oct. 1, 2001. ( Murrey Math Start Date ).

3. 2000-2001 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 13 04:53 ET. Because it is before 12:45 ET, back up 1 calendar day. Anchor Date = Oct. 12, 2000.

Subtract 4 trading days = Oct. 6, 2000.

** Note, Murrey's start date = Oct. 9, 2000 which is only different by 1 trading day and results from the rounding rule. Backtesting shows that Oct. 6, 2000 shows somewhat better turns, however, so I've stuck with the rounding rules as shown.

4. 1999-2000 Start Date:

Full Moon = Sept. 25, 1999 06:51 ET. Because it is before 12:45 ET, back up 1 calendar day. Anchor Date = Sept. 24, 1999.

Add 8 trading days = Oct. 6, 1999 ( Murrey Math Start Date. )

5. 1998-1999 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 5, 1998 16:12 ET. No rounding needed. Anchor Date = Oct. 5, 1998 ( Murrey Math Start Date. )

6. 1997-1998 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 15, 1997 23:46 ET. No rounding needed. Anchor Date = Oct. 15, 1997 ( Murrey Math Start Date. ) Subtract 8 trading days = Oct. 3, 1997 ( Murrey Math Start Date. )

7. 1996-1997 Start Date:

Full Moon = Sept. 26, 1996 22:51 ET. No rounding needed. Anchor Date = Sept. 26, 1996 Add 4 trading days = Oct. 2, 1996 ( Murrey Math Start Date. )

8. 1995-1996 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 8, 1995 11:52 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 7, 1995 ( Saturday ). Back to trading day = Oct. 6, 1995 ( Murrey Math Start Date. )

9. 1994-1995 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 19, 1994 08:18 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 18, 1994 Subtract 8 trading days = Oct. 6, 1994

** Note, Murrey Math Start Date = Oct. 7, 1994 (rounding difference)

10. 1993-1994 Start Date:

Full Moon = Sept. 30, 1993 14:54 ET. Anchor Date = Sept. 30, 1993 Add 4 trading days = Oct. 6, 1993

11. 1992-1993 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 11, 1992 14:03 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 9, 1992 ( nearest trading day ). Subtract 4 trading days = Oct. 5, 1992

12. 1991-1992 Start Date:

Full Moon = Sept. 23, 1991 18:40 ET. Anchor Date = Sept. 23, 1991 Add 8 trading days = Oct. 3, 1991

13. 1990-1991 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 4, 1990 08:02 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 3, 1990 Start Date = Oct. 3, 1990

14. 1989-1990 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 14, 1989 16:32 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 13, 1989 Subtract 8 trading days = Oct. 3, 1989

15. 1988-1989 Start Date:

Full Moon = Sept. 25, 1988 15:07 ET. Anchor Date = Sept. 23, 1988 Add 8 trading days = Oct. 5, 1988

16. 1987-1988 Start Date:

Full Moon = Oct. 7, 1987 00:12 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 6, 1987 Start Date = Oct. 6, 1987

FUTURE START DATES:

1. 2003 Start Date

Full Moon = Oct. 10, 2003 03:27 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 9, 2003 Subtract 4 trading days = Oct. 3, 2003.

2. 2004 Start Date

Full Moon = Sept. 28, 2004 09:09 ET. Anchor Date = Sept. 27, 2004 Add 4 trading days = Oct. 1, 2004

3. 2005 Start Date

Full Moon = Oct. 17, 2005 08:14 ET. Anchor Date = Oct. 14, 2005 Subtract 8 trading days = Oct. 4, 2005.

So, what do you think FOM? Pretty close, or all wet...

PS 32-bar 2/8 time date coming Monday, expect stall of up move for 1-2 days here. Good Trading, Mike

All "Murrey's Maths" developments (at least most of them) are based on Tim Kruzel notes widely available on the net..

Murrrey's book is rarely quoted by users. I assume that very few people have read it or own it.

The following post from a developper/programmer (2002) is for your information :

I had direct interchanges with Tim some 18 months to 2 years ago and noted or recall the following:

1) his widely disseminated notes were a rough draft; Tim Kruzel never intended for them to "get out" - that just kind of happened after he posted his e-mail to THM.

2) The process defined in Tim Kruzel's notes was a pretty good start; but is by no means the "right way" and (as Kruzel says) there are fundamental flaws.

3) Tim Kruzel AMM.EXE program uses later revision(s) of the algorithm. His metastock code is somewhere between the "notes" and "AMM".

4) Tim Kruzel's work past AMM.EXE; never made public or put into a program except for his own use.

5) Tim Kruzel doesn't trade exclusively on Murrey Math.

6) XChartMM is not "Kruzel's notes" applied graphically; I too started with his notes but quickly found they were not right (as Tim confirmed). Then I started to work, got a clue or two from Tim, and some time later, well, here we are.

But, only Murrey knows Murrey's actual algorithm! Tim doesn't know it, I don't know it.


7) There are a lot of "MM add-ons" in use for tradestation, metastock, this & that; most of them are 100% based on Kruzel's rough draft notes (which are not right as we already discussed and Kruzel confirmed).

Hence, there are a lot of frustrated people out there who say "Murrey's stuff doesn't work".

It's not "Murrey's stuff" unless you have Murrey's actual stuff!! Go to his classes and use his software to get the "real thing"!

This isn't an advert for THM either! It is "what is", plain and simple.

Note that nor Tim nor the programmer explain us what is the correct way to use "Murrey' Maths" and what are the "fundamental flaws" of Tim Kruzel's notes which are widely disseminated

Then we are on our own !

N/Y full moon Sept 24th so OCT 3rd ?

Dave according the "rules" / algorithm of this guy it seems the correct date

But, only Murrey knows Murrey's actual algorithm! Tim doesn't know it, I don't know it.

It is just incorrect .... because Murrey has IMHO NO ALGORITHM. !

a) Murrey has no programming ability
b) Murrey lives in Nashville (Tennessee)
c) The developper of Murrey's software (Krystof Werling) lived in Germany at the time.
d) Murrey is a disorganised person proof is in the book he wrote, in his articles, in his behaviour with customers etc. IMHO I am not sure he understands the rigourousness and work necessary to develop a trading software program.
e) when you live in Nashville Tennessee why choosing a german guy living in Germany to develop your software - stange isn't it ?
f) remember that it was at the end of the 90's - we had no Skype, no Webinar possibilities etc - expensive foreign calls etc

then Murrey explains something to Wherling who programs it - ????

I am quite sure that Masterrmind can appreciate the obvious difficulties and possible flaws of such a procedure.

I will not worry any further about Circles . . . experienced traders such as the three of you have made your way successfully for years without (or minimally with) them.

Your second extracted quote is another matter. This was a real 'ah ha' moment for me. What you say seems SO obvious once read, but I did not see it myself even while thinking on MTF issues and MML. So many thanks on pointing this out. I was experimenting with D1, H4 and H1 and even a bit of M15, but this makes terrific sense to me. I was taking slices of D1 down but the use of just two octaves for something less than H1 make great logic to me.

As they say in the martial arts movies, "bow to your sensei!" Consider it done.

I am sorry the management of the Murrey site and organization seems to have fallen into disarray. I would have been interested in trying this perhaps for a year, but this seems to make little sense at this time.

Thank you for sharing your experience.

Very powerful quote. I greatly appreciate your observation and opinion. FS