Pattern's Chemo-Electric Trading Journal

Dump time! Yayyy.
















--------------------------------------------------





Chart study, discretionary no-indicator - wise, is view-only measuring; thus, velocity, tension, distance and other precise variables, which are used in most of life, are less useful.
The anchor idea is relative, and thus suitable for view-only measuring. I have a new way, one that makes ff shapes -- the original expansion ( ) -- able to give different features of an anchor set to decide where to put TL's etc. on it.

cohesion

response, stability, repetition

direction

While the dot list of anchors is fairly balanced between verbal description/name and the symbol, the symbol is more valued than the verbal description with these ff shapes / anchor views; thus, one may also interpret cohesion as gathering, response as impulse, repetition as layers, etc.

Thus, the new post#1 (so what...):



Right now, I think I can apply these to ordinary psych in the areas I've written about, at least until I can switch to local definitions to get further into an area. Global relative connectedness in this way is what I want, to open charts' applicability.


Okay, wait, I got'em aligned:


Simulator test flubbed badly. Attached this:
"Note: This object-oriented method has no area ranking, so user must use MTF or similar."

More simulator test, trades still poor. Added one more:
"When or how much a certain object's projection turns valid, is the subject of much loss. "

Risk looks okay now.

-----------

New territory for me:
A causative change in volatility.
Been wantin' this one since 2004 and vix...
And don't blame it on the symtri across the way. Its level is too off the GF's vertical.


This is important. So, I renamed the approach "volatility anchors".

Wait! Uncovered another.
The price action is readable through how 'weak' or 'strong' an anchor is on either side of the opposition (2) center, enabling my reading that is contrary to the exact evidence of how the price action tells the opposite of my interpretation.


Last: the jump-dot cycle that goes with emotion cycle, I think I can expand to any inter-anchor ratio and still retain the cycle's impact. A caveat is that relabeling one anchor a cycle position is concept-dependent.

GREAT!
A line patterns - type breakthrough.
Also did such when did a Binet spin after a history recall method (run-consol-bounce, I think it was).
Thing is, it's different than the enclosed-area detail-and-approximate (high in-trade drawdowns) that I 10X'ed in 17h on 400 (250):1 a few years ago.
Now, I'm getting 50, 100 -pip runs with low in-trade drawdowns.

Of course, I was also doing spastic margin calls about five minutes ago ....





-----------------

DUMP TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now I worry about retaining those great trade stats....





This may do it...




It works okay, plus no more mushy pattern reading such as the "thinking model" stuff used. The pattern reading is more more clear and uses anchors much more plainly, while retaining the basic chemical definitions.
Fight-or-flight response is only here through the vertical and horizontal divisions of paired anchor types. Its "ff shapes" were also dropped as mushy, even though they also worked to a degree. The response could be applied when necessary, such as with a gut reading, using anchor pairs; it may even be better, given how involved the one example of gut reading I posted was.

New version, did a lot of rewriting in the first post before this one:





Note express, logical order to use of MT4's drawing devices that are regular polygons, at the 3-anchor type.
-
The psych finally works simply and with the chart.

If there were one cognitive bias that I would pick to explain trading errors, it'd be cognitive dissonance, or more recently something I happened to find googling, Parallel Constraint Satisfaction Processes, or "how structure can impact attitude change" (1). A good wake-up call is this wikipedia diagram of cognitive dissonance. Adaptive preference formation

Looking at my thinking model, there are three other theories like cognitive dissonance
-- moving optical illusion, applicable if one thinks of a visual field diagram (at least the plainest one I posted a while ago), as well as mois' basis of the clash of evolutionary adaptation of the senses and modern existence
-- cognitive testing, which I believe is, in an interpersonal framework, sometimes more of a factor in disbelief than it is with validity of the test itself
-- learned helplessness, "a condition of a human being or an animal in which it has learned to behave helplessly, even when the opportunity is restored for it to help itself by avoiding an unpleasant or harmful circumstance to which it has been subjected." (1)

A favorite thinking model of mine is the wicked problem. I just now found, through googling the stuff above, a centuries-old thinking model called "argument map".

Why am I typing all this junk? Trying to sound big, maybe.

What's going on is that the xy axis with shapes at the 0,0 point are okay for a psych model when trading. I just thought adding the noted four cognitive biases etc. would help strengthen the trading approach; only, maybe not, I could merely go negative on the xy axis for times when I was wrong and traded it.

The middle portion is 0,0 x,y axis, to find and use a chart shape,
and the chart shape, in which one can also use as a thinking model for one's actions
-- a box may be the area one works in, or a triangle two people with conflicting ideas about how to use an object or interpret a concept --,
is somewhere exactly on the chart before and after the middle portion's use.

From wikipedia.com's article on cognitive dissonance --
(removed picture; visit entry at site)

(Cognitive dissonance is the one of the four noted that belongs to where trading goes in my thinking model, which is why I chose it to follow it. There's also some "prediction"-related talk in its article.)

-----

Was trading simulator after rewriting one of the 5-anchor shapes, and found a new version of the line pattern 4 type I was trying to describe before. One puts a midline through the upright pattern's TL's to position the inverted pattern's TL's into place. The example follows:

a centered line proxy:


Also figured how 'fighter jet' (from my EURUSD Patterns thread, a very early post) works (cross two trends over big triangle in the middle, so that tri's midpoint aligns with the two trends' crossover point somehow). Example also shows a regular line proxy, albeit from a symmetrically bound pattern. ('Proxy jet' means nothing, was happy I'd defined an entire area with two precisely defined (if not historically/statistically proven) patterns I'd created.)



There was a big right angle and then the smaller, precise frame after momo following the big right angle. I figured the lack of 45degree angles was telling, so made a triangle where none existed. Was a new use for me.

I apologize, just more of my worthless stuff.

!@#% You all -- that is, participants in a discussion about volatility, at this thread -- just got me to use an indicator.

Why? A simple alternative to measuring volatility is to separate mean, mode, median and range. (Definitions.)

So I thought (which is where I went wrong...), what's the most easily recalled indicator that combines these terms and then some, and got Bollinger Bands.
B-bands can use the median (range/2) as its only line, with MT4's standard version.
Smash the bars and thus the median, only line, version of B-bands, and one gets a simple way to interpret the chart for trend angles.
Angles, if tiny trends' angles are read lots in a row, tell where price goes next. It's a good simplifier for temporary patterns overall, making TL's and TL combos (midlines, logr's) longer-lasting, to get one away from the extra information and toward a higher average of pips gained.

I realize lots of people already use a median line, just putting my own spin on it.

---------------



Revising the psych again.


This one has my own psych model's nomenclature in it, so bear with me.



You can ignore the red-circled stuff, for the noted reason. Also, the numbers are anchors already used; I interpreted each anchor with one shape that applies to this setup, instead of the one concept and infinite shapes.
Since the purpose of the exercise is for the studied entity to do what the studying entity wants it to, opposing and/or simple-complex division of an anchor's shapes may be a given: Anchor #1 has the studier be/control/design a midline, when the studied has a strong (logr) reaction; anchor #2 is opposition to the studied and a channel/bounds to the studier; and so on.
Note that the studied entity has its own set of actions, so the studier's purpose is to trap the studied with different anchors. Conversion of a scene (as a subset for temporariness within 'scenario') from 2, for instance, can be tested with carefully designed circumstances for when it goes to anchor #1 or 3. This may be critical to guide a scenario, as an opposition (2) may turn permanent (1: center) or into a useful weakness (3: compromise, or readable pattern in and of itself also anchorable).

The idea is to separate how one anchor and its viscera react to an environs.
Action: You test an entity and look for strong reactions and where they measure for dopamine (dominance), serotonin (playfulness), GABA (group obedience), and acetycholine (to get past an item with or with out it influencing or being influenced by itself),
while the entity encounters and/or interacts necessarily with various entities of different levels and areas of importance relative to that entity.
Reaction: Meanwhile, the entity does various anchors and axis-imbalancing (proto-)emotions to get through this reaction-studied exercise.

Thus, the study is more a hatchet version of who someone is in a particular, and often repeated, scenario, on the action side, and a build-up of compromises and defenses in exchange for whatever motive keeps the studied entity in the scenario, on the reaction side.

Sticking with the program I have. Consistency is the watchword. Will be listing reasons to trade on simulator for a couple of years ago.




trade 1, afterward -- Several losses, and I wanted this one. Missed the in-trade, got the idea.


--------

(next morning)

Rearranged the groups of examples for each anchor type:




anchor table
rows -- . ~together ; __~separate
columns -- simple (L); complex (R)

anchor#
1 midline
ellipse / halfway between midline and logr
logr

2 simple
less simple
complex

3 simple
complex

5 simple/repetitive
complex

Finally,
dropped the pretentious inside box's unrecognizable symbology, for something obvious and relatively immediately available to others.

revised post#1:



I hope someone understands this; I get sick of improving it with new information introduced.
The bio stuff in the upper left corner of the picture are an amateur's suggestion starter only.


use of the above, to study a trade (psych and chart studies almost completely blended (no, I can't read the chart as if that were psych, only how I studied and picked and attended to the chart; same symbology, is all) :

I'll give lots more examples, if this picture works for me.
As for the patterns you don't understand, just study/use the ones you do to connect with the psych study of a trade.

I think you are making it too advanced. You are operating with an amount of variables that makes my head spin to even begin to give them readings and bounce them off of eachother. I think you should focus on the smallest element that you can call "pattern", the atom of price if you will.

I hope you know i am saying this at the same time as i am following my own advice, so what im doing is thinking loudly.

Thanks for the advice.
Now, if I could only reduce myself to a few number of variables.



Okay, here's something. You can see it's just a conversion of the last picture; I need this, since I listed under those headings the familiar names of most all the patterns I've used over the past several years.
I guess it's kinda odd I didn't list midline and logr, which are what patterns boil down to for me; it was getting on my nerves, being so dependent on these (and angle), when their real connection was skewed and fragmented.
I'll get around to explaining them ; ) No, really, I'll at least draw in what I look for. I just want to see if this order holds.

pattern groups

Dropped the extra things to think about, and just synopsized in the subtitles.

METHOD

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Angles make up the price-time line, and you pick the strongest angles to make the trade.
midline / elliptical curve / logr, which provide angle tension, make patterns.
A good categorization of these patterns is below:

I need to make $1000 a month, and have about $100, maybe $400, to get it.
I know I have to work up the $100 over a couple of years or something.
One thing I can't get the hang of, is stop losses. I get it, TP at one TL and SL at another. Keep it big, say 35 SL and 50 TP. Only, how do you control your behavior at the same time? Don't do no good without that. So I usually give up, and keep losing (simulator) accounts.
Over 2 years and nada to show; lost 85k over 12 years, before. So what that hey am I doing here? I can read charts about better than anyone here, only I ain't C O N S I S T E N T -- What's WRONG with me? I give up, I move on, Idunno... I got a skill, it's just why, how and when does this pay off for me. I got BILLS, dammit, and my free ride ain't gonna last forever. Then, I'm DEAD. yahearme? DEAD, or some hobo close enough whose inner worth dried up except for society's placement of'm. SHHEEEit. NUthin'.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

with simulator you mean fast forward simulations? if not, i highly recommend you fast forward paper trade to test your emotional reactions to price movement, you can easily see after a few minutes how your mind gets in your way and can adjust your mindset towards stop loss setting, trailing stop, exiting a position. it also helps playing the same situation again and again each with different psychological or technical approaches, you may not get a tradable system out of it but you can easily differentiate your (wrong) psychological responses to usual market activity.

after i did this i realised my problem was i had no patience, not in the sense of waiting, but rather being patient like when you are dealing with a child. i had to learn to ignore the teasing and make decisions based on changes in states.

SL 6 TP 6? Try it.

You are human, you want definitive things, you want answers, you want stuff, you want to eat. Those things are whats getting in they way for it paying off for you. Those things is what makes it even relevant for something to pay off in the first place. Thats existentially.

Technically you could check out my template that i posted today. Thats all the way ive come in far to many hours and far to little to show for it, but i would quite today if i think i couldnt do it. I can honestly say i dont know anyone in this world better then me at doing the exact thing im doing. I would have no good idea how to trade for TP 35 SL 50 so i cant give you anything on that other then to say someone would maybe use that for say M30/H1 trades and i wouldnt trade that considering my experience. Im not even sure its doable. I am however sure that other things is doable, much quicker things. For what i see price isnt decided that much in advance, but there are patterns to how it developes, when a certain thing has happend, its probable it will develop in a certain way after that.

Thanks for visiting, silverheat. LFH simulator from 1-1-2008 to present day. I've practiced simulator daily for 1/4 to 1/2 hour for maybe a year now, whatever earlier posts likely say.
"changes in states" sounds interesting. One interpretation is to accept who I am at that moment in time and deal with it well enough to get through the trade professionally. The weird thing is, I can work around others, there being managers above me and a set path to do the tasks I'm told to do, at my paid job (which is low-wage, so never mind what it, or rather they, are).

I have built psych into the method above, as the "impulse" etc. stuff links most all the rest into psych. And, I do have a personal model (the spaceship/helmet-like drawing, in a post some time ago), which is in actual use on the slow/theoretical side and works only in patches and tangents; I hope the method I just posted will exploit comprehensively and fast enough to bring its use together. Your call to be more adaptive psychologically is a good one, which I will try to go for.

No, I worked up to 35/50 on purpose, and intend to do 100 as well. 6/6 sounds too much to me, especially in forex. I couldn't handle it.

CORRECTION

I ONLY trade the 1' time frame -- only look at it. No indicators other than candles and drawing devices, reading the various levels of temporary patterns as noted in my method. Plus, whatever candles are there at the time I look at them, no more than half a day's worth, I trade. That I trade 20-100 pips from this, with 1.5:1 RR, with any kind of success, is a real accomplishment -- Far more than the typical 1' TF scalping or high-TF bigger-candle scalping for more pips, in my book.

It's more opportunity-efficient, as I'm right there to capture a 5' multi-dozen-pip drop, and more time-effective, as I doubt high-TF'ers could make $ off a chart study on two one-hour (at most, half a day's worth of) candles.
No, profit potentialwise, this is exactly where I want to be. That I found I must use a high-choice discretionary method to stay here, disturbs, only I think I've shown enough promise in making chart studies at this level of trading to, eventually, make it overall.

(post1 dump)

SL=TP, smaller/last SL if lose, keep TP's high, adjust both for early exits

I need to make $1000 a month, and have about $100, maybe $400, to get it.
I know I have to work up the $100 over a couple of years or something.
One thing I can't get the hang of, is stop losses. I get it, TP at one TL and SL at another. Keep it big, say 35 SL and 50 TP. Only, how do you control your behavior at the same time? Don't do no good without that. So I usually give up, and keep losing (simulator) accounts.
Over 2 years and nada to show; lost 85k over 12 years, before. So what that hey am I doing here? I can read charts about better than anyone here, only I ain't C O N S I S T E N T -- What's WRONG with me? I give up, I move on, Idunno... I got a skill, it's just why, how and when does this pay off for me. I got BILLS, dammit, and my free ride ain't gonna last forever. Then, I'm DEAD. yahearme? DEAD, or some hobo close enough whose inner worth dried up except for society's placement of'm. SHHEEEit. NUthin'.
A hobby of mine a dozen years ago was to collect unusual meditation styles. To break my stalemate on profitable consistency, this exercise makes a routine that matches how I am that hour:
confidence market emotion cycle; positive(,) self-talkABLE
change extreme spirituality; ecstatic posturesCHG
control Continuum w/ book synopsis; Image Stream; Freeze-FrameLVG
definition my trading method; Metaphoria, hypnosis scripts; chemo-electric relation commodities p.m. series (my model: uses 'real','true' on a chart's xy axis; w/os)AREA
threat heart x; a balance and weights book I have somewhere; craniosacral therapy (at least, the Heart of Listening version, which is available to the public through libraries), Anatomy Trains (especially its fight-or-flight response section)iNJuRy

psych version:

tax time --
I finally broke down and did my only foray into real forex trades from a couple of years ago (losses, so could delay (gov't owes me)).
I can't beLIEVE this:
I risked .4 MILLION DOLLARS on ONE TRADE!@!@!?!
(expl'n -- 400:1, scalping)
Eye opener....

other news --
Got a new approach; more complicated in appearance than ever.
Anchors rounded them up, tho, which is nice, so nice I got a psych way to describe each regular polygon on the chart if necessary when build psych atop the chart's technical study. (Talk about prepared...)

more tax-time reflections:

I traded NERVOUS! It wasn't just the number of times an hour I traded instead of waiting for an opportune moment to study the market again,
it was preferring to concentrate on amount of money over proof of opportunity. The latter got so bad, at least in the stock trading, that I'd choose stock symbols that eerily resembled how well I was trading at the moment and leveraged numbers of cash that resembled, in a way, how I felt at that moment. I was focussed on the environment around and mystique about trading, rather than on trading itself.

Another about taxes --
I forwent ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY TIMES the allowed loss I could have had if I had planned to trade different stock symbols.
Clinically insane.

It's emblematic that a) knowing tax rules makes money and b)...uh, well, that's all. Enough, for sure.


---

Same trading method, those five types of symbol tables, each one an anchor. At least it's creative, and I can think about it during the rest of my life. Of course, one can say this about the rest of my revisions, too. Hmm...Mindset is still a good way to describe the anchor tables' purpose, only now the anchors tied mindset directly into the chart study. (Big deal.)
I guess, about after I've finished taxes, I'll test the veracity of connecting a regular polygon on the chart with something psychological.

----------

This idea to trade for much of my income has gotten a lot more difficult, with this post.


-------

One thing about my current path in rewriting my trading method, is that

1. regular polygons are fully meshed with anchors and the chart,
2. the mindset approach covers the random way a pure chart drawer picks a trade at any one time,
3. and the size of the number of symbols really, really bothers me, even if I find use/comfort from them.
4. I do like describing certain things in life permanently and then referring to them when it'll influence my mindset anyway.
5. I still don't get how anchors fit the chart, however well they may.

And yes, there's a b) : My own records. Because of my poor recordkeeping, I'm probably not going to get carryovers from other years.
!@#$, I lead an expensive life.

Not that I'm a fool about a lot of things; I'm pretty smart. It's that I've realized, from this tax year experience, that a trading obsession (/impulse control?) is just the tip of the iceberg to lots of other difficulties in a person's life. That I haven't been wise, or rather smart in a longer-term way, is perhaps the overall thing to concentrate on.

I gotta make $ from this junk, which means I must look through all the randomness. I'm sure there's more I need lurking somewhere...

Hubris that I know exactly what to do at that time may be some of the poor recordkeeping. I did find carryover, so I was smarter than I thought; on the other hand, I lost/misplaced other important papers I thought I had.

(And yes, this has a lot to do with trading.)

A series of logical actions -- find this paper, rectify these numbers, call this company -- can easily lead one astray from the narrow pile of records left from any one time period of hubristic feeling of smartness I had at the original look-through and work effort. This possibility of incompleteness fuels desperation, the need for 'rescue', and more monetary loss.
And that's exactly where I am now.

on the need for 'rescue':

So that's encouraging, that my mindset tables (tied in with anchors, and thus the chart) in detail, speedily and only address this type of decisionmaking.
I've got to clean up my paper-trail mess, deal with the big tax loss (from missing my refund from losing so much $ from earlier years) I'm to get, and move on with my life.
And project consequences and risk for each decision I make. Especially to repeatedly/tactically-strategically do this, revising decision until satisfied with risk vs. reward of that decision. And I'll have to learn how to do this, since I've obviously not before.
Why? To repeat:
A series of logical actions -- find this paper, rectify these numbers, call this company -- not done well and early can easily lead one astray from the narrow pile of records left from any one time period of hubristic feeling of smartness I had at the original look-through and work effort. This possibility of incompleteness or having the need for rethinking and thus repathing fuels desperation, the need for 'rescue', and more monetary loss, which, repeated, leads to absolute loss of everything.


------------------


Okay, I have a new approach that replaces that in post#1.
It focuses on the complexity of each shape, designed to keep a chart reading at once simple enough to be within my capacity to function through trading and defined enough to cover the task.

-------------

taxes, again:

a good line -- "the buzz of procrastination for a few more months "

your posts are inspirational, maybe because you are so honest about your progress or maybe because partially i find myself in it

anyways, isn't why we trade because we want more freedom & independence? but with it comes self-reliance and responsibility, i don't want to rely on anyone else, i want to be responsible for my financial decisions, making money is only a byproduct of how well i use my abilities to maintain that self-sufficiency, in trading, when you push buy or sell, it's just you, but also your success or failure, and i like that, because when i look in the mirror i can say i did this, like when you carve into a wooden bench i was here

about impulse, i think this is the i have to make $ thought, you think you need to act now, when in reality opportunities are plenty, you can wait on the sidelines and let price come to where it fits you, again and again, making time your ally, it's like the tortoise Cassiopeia in Momo, the slower Cassiopeia went the faster he travelled, the harder Momo tried to follow him, the farther she fell behind

enough on psychology, for a while. Seems I hit a wall on it. Appreciate the advice and compliment, silverheat. AND, yaed, your input.




---------------------
FIRST OF FOUR POSTS
ON ONE SERIES OF GANN FANS

Here's an interesting use of Gann Fan:
(first chart)
I extend two straight trends into nonPA space and spot a GF on the crossover, noting that the GF's lines go well with the next several trends.
It's a somewhat opposing-angle-like channel.

a GF that more expands on the horizontal side (07022010)


(second chart)
calls turn

(3rd)
opposing angles change general reaction to GF


(4th)
entire opposing-angle area slants vs. an earlier, presumedly the first chart's, such area


(5th)
a new opposing-angle area, just as channel-like as the first chart's, takes control after the 4th chart leaves the GF's area.



-----

another: a GF drawn between the difference in angle -- thus, the angle tension from -- a frame and a triangle :


This GF aligned very well with the 5th chart's new area (not shown) and PA made obvious how important this GF was to it:

(continued)

This one has a couple more remote GF's and natural-GF midlining,
and is mostly about how older such GF's interrelate with newer ones and in what order:



4th chart: a natural GF's remote GF (07162010)