trading forex using Gartley Patterns | Page 42 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Question on butterfly and gartley patterns 0 replies

Someone pls comment on my gartley patterns 0 replies

Gartley Trading 1 reply

Find the Gartley 47 replies

Gartley on the brain 1 reply

Attachments: trading forex using Gartley Patterns
Exit Attachments

trading forex using Gartley Patterns

  • #821
  • Edited 11:41pm Mar 28, 2011 11:16pm | Edited 11:41pm
Quoting ChinaWombat
i'm happy to look at anything that can improve the success in producing a higher probability pattern recognition process, however


1) you can download the pattern finder quite easily as it's just ZUP...
China PLEASE understand that is NOT dustin - dustin charges $2K for those indicators u say are freely available - fxgroundworks is a mentoring site that provides pattern alerts - MUCH different.

I think the 50 point check may not be quite 50 - its just his way of saying it does all the hard work of checking things for u.

Anyway thats just my understanding - im neither here or there on what they are offering but thought it was interesting.

Oh - are u saying his trading results arent goood ? I'd kill for that equity curve in such a tough market

And about the grammar - does it really matter ? We're not here to learn english , and we're not all perfect at it - this is the internet
  • #822
  • Mar 29, 2011 12:47am Mar 29, 2011 12:47am
Quoting ChinaWombat
ps to Dustin, please stop mumbling, read the script clearly, and
a) light is spelled light, not lite, eh.
b) we're up is not were up (we are up= we're up), eh.
c) 'out' is pronounce as in 'shOUT' not as 'oot' as in 'shOOT', eh!

now where to find a new broker....
Your great at pointing out peoples mistakes. Let me point out the ones you made:

You said: "see if anything that i have missed"
Should be: "see if there is anything that I have missed"

You said: "the crown pattern i have seen very little on"
Should be: "the crown pattern I have seen very little about" (not "on")

You said: "so can't rely on his article to much"
Should be: "can't rely on his article too much"

Perhaps you should spend less time pointing out pointless mistakes and concentrate more on your trading.

Further you should read the blog on the study they posted. Read about what is defined as a successful pattern and the results off patterns hitting targets. Just my own opinion. You really should do your research.
Know your indicators!
  • #823
  • Mar 29, 2011 1:17am Mar 29, 2011 1:17am
Quoting trader346
Your great at pointing out peoples mistakes. Let me point out the ones you made:

You said: "see if anything that i have missed"
Should be: "see if there is anything that I have missed"

You said: "the crown pattern i have seen very little on"
Should be: "the crown pattern I have seen very little about" (not "on")

You said: "so can't rely on his article to much"
Should be: "can't rely on his article too much"

Perhaps you should spend less time pointing out pointless mistakes and concentrate...
Please leave this thread if that is all you are going to contribute.
  • #824
  • Mar 29, 2011 1:27am Mar 29, 2011 1:27am
Also China, I'm into the e/u Gartley showing on the h1 and m15. Which targets a ompletion of the h4 Gartley circa 1.4
  • #825
  • Mar 29, 2011 3:40am Mar 29, 2011 3:40am
Daily Jumbo Gartley:

I am posting this early, but all the same....it's been marked for the future.

Price is currently trapped in a large daily triangle and price hit the top and is dipping which is about to give entry for jumbo gartley.

Convergences: 88.6 of XA, 127.2 of BC,ABCD, possible trend line bounce and daily support level....good luck...lol.

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: gcad jumbo.gif Size: 28 KB


Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: gcad jumbo minimised.gif Size: 17 KB
  • #826
  • Mar 29, 2011 4:57am Mar 29, 2011 4:57am
Quoting pipmyride
China PLEASE understand that is NOT dustin - dustin charges $2K for those indicators u say are freely available - fxgroundworks is a mentoring site that provides pattern alerts - MUCH different.

I think the 50 point check may not be quite 50 - its just his way of saying it does all the hard work of checking things for u.

Anyway thats just my understanding - im neither here or there on what they are offering but thought it was interesting.

Oh - are u saying his trading results arent goood ? I'd kill for that equity curve in such a tough market...

i didn't mean to suggest you were dustin... as he & derek pop by here every now and it was directed soley at him to improve the video content delivery...

it was a marketing device but lost it's value when he was just mumbling away...what is the point of speaking if you can't be understood, so just a tip to try and help him out

the grammer was for their benefit of the sub-titles on the video...just to make it a bit more professional (plus a little dig at the maple leaf land enunciation of "oot and aboot" which cracks me up every time I visit there for business or holidays

on this forum i don't really give a rats arse on correct grammer (hence my lack of capitalisation) as there are a huge number of non-native english speakers so we have to be flexible....for native english speakers i think basic spelling and grammer are just simple social skills, especially when on a promotional video for which you want people to pay for, but seems some people want to disagree with me there as well...no biggie

on their equity curve i'm just confused. if patterns are minimal 88% successful (without 50 indicators) on 1,000's & 1,000's of back tested patterns, and they have a R:R of 1.5 then I would expect a super positive equity curve... so for me that is the real issue. why do you need any additional indicators when you're already batting 0.9 for minimum 1.5? greed, perfection, holy grail?

i'm open, like yourself, to the product...if it can do what it is promised to do, then it sounds like a useful tool to add to your trading arsenal, however the key is the indicator that it is based upon. is it curve fitted for just ZUP? if you run zup and kor together sometimes they have same patterns, sometime opposite patterns, or one may have a pattern while the other doesn't.

generally when I post a pattern here it is not on zup or kor, or maybe it appears later. i don't see the point to post patterns which the indi's are already showing. this is for my own educational benefit, and hopefully for the 2 other readers and 1 spotted dog, (and now yourself) who pass by the thread can add comments, or their experience, on the patterns i throw up here (and some do need throwing up on!)....

what i was rambling on to say is that it's nice to have the bells and whistle EA or whatever they call it but there is no substitute for doing the manual calculations and understanding of the position of the pattern within the chart formation...which Scott Carney describes very well in his Vol2 especially as the indicators REPAINT!
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #827
  • Mar 29, 2011 5:19am Mar 29, 2011 5:19am
Quoting ChinaWombat
on their equity curve i'm just confused. if patterns are minimal 88% successful (without 50 indicators) on 1,000's & 1,000's of back tested patterns, and they have a R:R of 1.5 then I would expect a super positive equity curve... so for me that is the real issue. why do you need any additional indicators when you're already batting 0.9 for minimum 1.5? greed, perfection, holy grail?


Well Scott uses RSI as you probably know, so I don’t think there is anything wrong with using additional tools as confirmation when trading. I don’t think it’s looking for the Holy Grail and I don’t believe that is what Scott is doing by using RSI. It’s a nice way to look for confirmation and helps with pattern selection.

If you read what they define as success, a breakeven trade is counted as successful and they say there is a win / loss % of 70-75%. Again, do your research.

But since you brought up the topic of Risk vs Reward, you out of all people should then understand that your win% can be very low if your risk vs. reward is quite good, so you can't base an equity curve base off a win % Just try to do it with fapturbo which I think we both know gets you nowhere fast.

All I’m saying is that I disagree with you that indicators cannot be used with patterns and you seemed to imply they are looking for a holy grail by doing so. As a fan of Scott I would imagine you would agree, so I’m confused at the reason for posting that comment.

Regardless, I'm not sure this conversation is effective, so please don't bother to comment, I think were done here. Two people that disagree, that’s all it is.

Have a good day.
Know your indicators!
  • #828
  • Mar 29, 2011 5:27am Mar 29, 2011 5:27am
Quoting trader346

Perhaps you should spend less time pointing out pointless mistakes and concentrate more on your trading.

Further you should read the blog on the study they posted. Read about what is defined as a successful pattern and the results off patterns hitting targets. Just my own opinion. You really should do your research.
1. unfortunately i have no broker price feed so no need to concentrate on anything

2. i have been through their website and was unable to find any 'blog' so please help me to find the link to help me understand their parameters
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #829
  • Edited 5:57am Mar 29, 2011 5:45am | Edited 5:57am
Quoting trader346
[color=black][font=Verdana] If you read what they define as success, a breakeven trade is counted as successful and they say there is a win / loss % of 70-75%. Again, do your research.
.
oh please don't just scuttle away after flaming me...

"Trader's Comments:

Breakeven Trades were counted as losers. Lowers our win%, but in exchange you can see how powerful the win% actually is. If these were included as winners we would be around the 78% mark. As you can see there were quite a few trades where we got stopped out in the month of December."


this is from one of their monthly reports posted on the website so please do your research a little more thoroughly... so you can see the disconnect hopefully...

My comments were on the fxgoundworks promotion of these patterns and their success rate without a visible measure of what they say success is. So please enlighten us mere mortals with what it is.

I've been through the website and cannot find it, yet I can find many other things so for a computer ludite like myself then it's not transparent!

I have never mentioned anything negative about Scott. Yes, I know he uses RSI, just as others use candles, other lagging indicators. Whatever you need to feel comfortable to take the trade. I like S&R and dynamic S&R. I never said you can't use indicators with harmonics, but 50 of them? Does the marginal value of the trade call diminish if only 48 say go and 2 say no?
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: fxgroundworks study.jpg Size: 156 KB
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #830
  • Mar 29, 2011 8:46am Mar 29, 2011 8:46am
Quoting ChinaWombat
Breakeven Trades were counted as losers. Lowers our win%, but in exchange you can see how powerful the win% actually is. If these were included as winners we would be around the 78% mark. As you can see there were quite a few trades where we got stopped out in the month of December."
I'm not to sure there is anything wrong with my research, perhaps there is something wrong with me. However since when does the 1 month dictate the overall success or failure of a method? You are looking at results of 1 month and even that one months results is not that bad! I believe the harmonic method to be very profitable. I can see it from my trading.

Quoting ChinaWombat
I never said you can't use indicators with harmonics, but 50 of them? Does the marginal value of the trade call diminish if only 48 say go and 2 say no?
I understand that English might not be your first language, but it says a 50 point check, not a 50 indicator check. Who can fit that many on their screen anyways?

Everyone can have their own opinion and all i'm saying, before you come down on a methodology so hard, you should consider all the facts and how they got them.

All i was trying to say is that my results line up with the study you were talking about, and in their article it talks about breakeven trades counting as successful trades.

Have a wonderful day.
Know your indicators!
  • #831
  • Mar 29, 2011 10:25am Mar 29, 2011 10:25am
China the question is why so sceptical - i understand scepticism as such, but how can u pick so many holes thru something from the outside - if Scott Carney is affiliated with fxgroundworks then dont u think HE of all people has done his due dilligence and knows whether they are legit or not ?

I mean bottom line NO ONE is saying an EA is gonna do a better job than a human - but if something can help out assisting with trades .. then why not ?
  • #832
  • Mar 29, 2011 7:35pm Mar 29, 2011 7:35pm
Quoting pipmyride
China the question is why so sceptical - i understand scepticism as such, but how can u pick so many holes thru something from the outside - if Scott Carney is affiliated with fxgroundworks then dont u think HE of all people has done his due dilligence and knows whether they are legit or not ?

I mean bottom line NO ONE is saying an EA is gonna do a better job than a human - but if something can help out assisting with trades .. then why not ?
I'm not saying they are not legit. Anybody that is trading harmonically, or promoting the method has my support. Now Scott is going to be associated with them provides added substance.

I'm just cautious on the promotion of a method that claims 88-90% 'success' without knowing what parameters that 'success' is based upon. The last thing I want to see is people trying the method and then having a run of losing trades when they were expecting 90% 'success' and then complaining harmonics don't work.

Other harmonic studies have provided the methodology they use to gauge the effectiveness of the harmonic patterns and none of them are 88%. Gartley claimed 70%, and Pesavento has claimed similar stats with his TP1 @ 1RR, and then breakeven. So if you're to build a trading plan based upon harmonics, entries,exits etc then I think this information should be required to be stated up front for transparency.

I don't actually care if it is a move to breakeven, a test of 23.6, 38.2, or 61.8. Some people even have a test back to A as the first tp for gartley as a qualifier for 'success'. I care that they tell you how they gauge 'success' so that no one has any outlandish expectations for what they should be expecting from the method.

Heck, I'm only batting 55-58% with initial target at .618CD, so if they have something that can get me out of this rut and up to 65~70% then i'll probably become a subscriber.

All I want to know is the criteria on which they say the pattern is successful. I think this is a basic minimal disclosure. Trader346 was unable to provide it, and I don't seem to be able to locate it. Hopefully when Derek pops by he can shed some more light on this.
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #833
  • Mar 29, 2011 9:08pm Mar 29, 2011 9:08pm
uchf h1 BO with close above after extended range with shallow pullback.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: swissyh1.jpg Size: 87 KB
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
  • #834
  • Mar 29, 2011 9:23pm Mar 29, 2011 9:23pm
Quoting mofo
uchf h1 BO with close above after extended range with shallow pullback.
that fit's in nicely with the 4H chart Mofo,

.9300ish there is very nice confluence @.886XA=1.27abcd=2.618bc plus prior pivots and dynamic declining resistance... one to keep an eye on...
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: 30mar 4h bat usdchf.gif Size: 29 KB
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #835
  • Mar 29, 2011 9:48pm Mar 29, 2011 9:48pm
still a little bit perplexed with eurusd longer term view... with B @.5 then am expecting for it to test lower, but if that is 1.3965 or 1.3910 or just a test of rising dynamic support just under 1.4 only time will tell. Nice confluences at both .786 and .886.

1.3910 stands out likes dogs balls for a possible test of the extreme buying volume (red arrows) which is the close of the candle that negates the bearish pin bar that forms X.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: 30mar 4h bat eurusd.gif Size: 31 KB
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #836
  • Mar 29, 2011 11:29pm Mar 29, 2011 11:29pm
Quoting ChinaWombat
and Pesavento has claimed similar stats with his TP1 @ 1RR, and then breakeven.
but let me correct you on a few things. In Larry's book he says the butterfly pattern is 80% accurate. You can see it in google books as its one of their free pages you can preview on the book.

As for the info you were looking for, its on their blog and not sure if i'm allowed to post the link but here is what it says:

====================

These patterns were on a variety of different time frames (5M, 15M, 30M, 1H, 4H, D, M).

  1. A reversal had to occur once price entered the PRZ, but not before price exceeded the furthest point of the PRZ. This would indicate a loss and not a successful pattern.
  2. A successful reversal must reverse 15% from when price entered the PRZ to where it exited the PRZ. If it did not reverse 15% and stayed inside the PRZ, again this would be a failed pattern.
  3. The patterns would not be filtered in any way, so no matter the size of the PRZ or the structure of the pattern, the pattern would be included in the study.
  4. After a trade moves 15% we automatically move stops to preserve our capital. The breakeven trades are counted as successful for a few reasons: A) Any professional trader would agree that a free ride in the market without losing money is a success! B) With the way the forex brokers work, you get rebates based off the volume you trade. Thus because a trade is breakeven you probably still get a 1 pip rebate from your broker. If you don't, I would consider finding one that would give you a rebate.

One important question left to answer:

One of the most popular questions we get after reading a study like this is: 'What is the % of profitable trades where the trades hit their target?'
Anywhere between 70-75%. When we ran the numbers with targets in mind, the success rate with JUST the pattern alone.
=====================

hopefully this clears things up

Know your indicators!
  • #837
  • Mar 30, 2011 12:32am Mar 30, 2011 12:32am
Quoting trader346
but let me correct you on a few things. In Larry's book he says the butterfly pattern is 80% accurate. You can see it in google books as its one of their free pages you can preview on the book.
=====================

hopefully this clears things up
Many thanks, it certainly does. Yes, Larry did say that but that was when he considered Butterflys to go to 1.618XA (not just 1.27XA i.e his s/l on the 1.27 was above 1.618 which is a little rich for me), before Scotts refinement into Bflys and Crabs. Also I was talking about Gartleys in particular but that may not have been clear so no need to correct me.

I do appreciate the posting of their methodology however...
I think the 15% threshold is curve fitting (but that is just me) and note that they do come back to the 70% for first target which seems to be the harmonic market standard...

at least we can now agree upon the benefits and successful structure of harmonic trading methods...and get back to our patterns...
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #838
  • Mar 30, 2011 3:26am Mar 30, 2011 3:26am
Quoting ChinaWombat
Many thanks, it certainly does. Yes, Larry did say that but that was when he considered Butterflys to go to 1.618XA (not just 1.27XA i.e his s/l on the 1.27 was above 1.618 which is a little rich for me), before Scotts refinement into Bflys and Crabs. Also I was talking about Gartleys in particular but that may not have been clear so no need to correct me.

I do appreciate the posting of their methodology however...
I think the 15% threshold is curve fitting (but that is just me) and note that they do come back to the 70% for first target which...
indeed... another guy thats done some extensive research on the stock side has a site, (still not sure if or what im allowed to post here) but type in harmonic patterns in google and it should come up as one of the first three. I think the guy is a IT guy and did it while he lost his job but since getting a new job he hasn't kept it going. he sells all his backtested data or something too and he does it per fib extention too etc
Know your indicators!
  • #839
  • Mar 30, 2011 4:16am Mar 30, 2011 4:16am
Quoting trader346
indeed... another guy thats done some extensive research on the stock side has a site, (still not sure if or what im allowed to post here) but type in harmonic patterns in google and it should come up as one of the first three. I think the guy is a IT guy and did it while he lost his job but since getting a new job he hasn't kept it going. he sells all his backtested data or something too and he does it per fib extention too etc

you mean Robert Browns work? http://www.harmonicpatterns.com/

he was one of the guys i alluded too earlier that provided a solid and transparent methodolgy for gauging the success of the various patterns (especially on the different extensions)...you've probably seen the attachment as well which gives similar results with a 45% ish win ratio but with .618 CD target or 2:1 RR.

I think both of these are more realistic and representitive of the methodology than the 15% price move out of the PRZ which I doubt is even tradeable and is marketing fluff.
Attached File(s)
File Type: pdf Trading the GARTLEY 222.pdf   700 KB | 4,530 downloads
Catching a falling knife, no, I'm just trading the Gartley!
  • #840
  • Mar 30, 2011 6:47am Mar 30, 2011 6:47am
Quoting ChinaWombat
you mean Robert Browns work? http://www.harmonicpatterns.com/

he was one of the guys i alluded too earlier that provided a solid and transparent methodolgy for gauging the success of the various patterns (especially on the different extensions)...you've probably seen the attachment as well which gives similar results with a 45% ish win ratio but with .618 CD target or 2:1 RR.

I think both of these are more realistic and representitive of the methodology than the 15% price move out of the PRZ which I doubt is even tradeable and is...
Not to sure i would be so quick to discount it. A 15% move outside the prz in a lot of cases is the first fib retracement you hit. Perhaps its just me, but seems like a valid time to move a stop. Although I know when to move stops etc are debatable so i do not want to get into that with you. All i want to say is there are a ton of ways to trade these and you have to do it with a way that works and fits your style of trading.
Know your indicators!
0 traders viewing now