DislikedWent long for AU at 1.0315 and moved SL to 1.0320. My target is 1.0350. The major trend at HTF is still down IMO so I do not expect a big gain here.Ignored
- #1,324
- Apr 16, 2012 10:06am Apr 16, 2012 10:06am
- | Commercial User | Joined Feb 2008 | 4,633 Posts
I(and others) have understood the importance of fundamentals from u Mr. LJ.
until few months back,i use to ignore fundamentals,but looking @ Economic Calendar has become a routine now.
Keep up the good work.
OK DONE↓
Yeah I'm still astounded by how many retail PA traders still believe that ignoring news is the best approach. I still see the statement "news is presented in PA" thrown around which is just utter rubbish.
- #1,332
- Apr 17, 2012 4:06am Apr 17, 2012 4:06am
Thanks Mincement for the detailed explanation. Yea, understood LJ is looking at SS/DD zone and not support/resistance. The area he has marked out definitely is an area of huge imbalance with the super large WRB. However, I thought the few bars before that rep some sort of imbalance too before buyers won and marked the origin (decision) of the move up.
Can LJ/ Mincemeat add further clarity? Thanks!
I guess you could say that there was some sort of imbalance before the area LJ marked where buyers overcame sellers (the area I have highlighted in yellow on LJs previous charts), but as you have also pointed out this imbalance is not nearly as prominent as the area of the source of the massive 5 minute bar marked in purple where demand clearly came in really strong and thus this would be the first area I would expect demand to come in again. Furthermore I had a daily SR marked at the 0.9932 level which for me provided further reason why price would react at this level and not expect price to move much further down.
This is not to say that price would not necessarily make it down to the area you were referring to, but you want to get in on the trade at the first area or level where you could expect price to react and IMO this would have been the 0.9932 level and since there was such a strong move from here the first time I would expect a very quick reaction on the return.
Hope that answers your question. LJ may have something further to add.
- #1,335
- Edited 8:29am Apr 17, 2012 8:10am | Edited 8:29am
- | Joined Jan 2011 | Status: Trader | 523 Posts
Did you get in on the immediate retest then? If so how come you took a loss considering price hit 1.4640 resistance area?
Why such a wide SL?
here goes my thinking:
1.46 is a strong S-R area as per the daily chart..esp. there are so many "recent" bar highs . Price broke this range on H4 yesterday.
1.4640 as u mention..now thats not an FTA(for me) given that it broke out such a huge range..the bars will keep moving up and down before giving the 'actual' move.unfortunately that 'actual' move never happend.yes i believed there was more to the story to the BO of the 1.46 range.Bringing FTA in between 'all the time' and putting trade @ BE is not effective.I believe its a blind-belief among the learners or retail traders that "once u hit FTA put ur SL to BE".that strategy is fine but not all the time.
as far SL is concerned i like giving more room,so here i used bar highs/lows to hide my SL,sometimes it may happen that by keeping SL tight,it hit SL just to see the trade moved in our favour,that's my concern
(ok correct me if i am wrong)i go to college,so sometimes im not on screen,so at times it happens that i may end up taking full loss.usually i take partial losses.(in this trade i took partial loss)
- #1,336
- Edited 8:27am Apr 17, 2012 8:15am | Edited 8:27am
- | Joined Jan 2011 | Status: Trader | 523 Posts
im in that trade,entry:66.53,SL:67.05.
watching Gchf closely 1.4586-1.46 range potential BO,
also keeping an eye on NCAd 0.82 BO(waiting for a daily close here).
here again for example,NZDCAD BO trade i took last week,
entry was a lil over 0.82,TP was below 0.8274,SL was hidden below the blue area.
now 0.82 is such a strong area,calling 0.8233 as a 'relevant' FTA is bit irrelevant in my opinion.
so if i had used the strategy "put to BE when it hits FTA"
i would hv got BE or with some lil locked profit.
yes i did put the trade @ BE when price hit the yellow area for the 2nd time,as it was a bit concern
P.S. : missed the 0.8270 sell trade here.it was on my radar.
(ofcourse i am a learner so these are just my thoughts)
- #1,337
- Edited 3:48pm Apr 17, 2012 9:27am | Edited 3:48pm
- | Commercial User | Joined Feb 2008 | 4,633 Posts
yes i took an immediate retest.
here goes my thinking:
1.46 is a strong S-R area as per the daily chart..esp. there are so many "recent" bar highs . Price broke this range on H4 yesterday.
1.4640 as u mention..now thats not an FTA(for me) given that it broke out such a huge range..the bars will keep moving up and down before giving the 'actual' move.unfortunately that 'actual' move never happend.yes i believed there was more to the story to the BO of the 1.46 range.Bringing FTA in between 'all the time' and putting trade @ BE is not effective.I...
Well 1.4640 is the FLR there is no subjectivity in it - it's the first potential resistance where price could stall or reverse, it's just you've chosen to ignore it in terms of your own trade management.
I do see this fairly regularly that just because we've got a breakout of a well defined range people think that price must now move with good momentum and not look back...not sure why people think that. Just because we've had a breakout does not mean we should ignore FLR/S's IMO.
Yes I agree blindly putting your SL to BE at every FLR/S is not a great trade management strategy.
as far SL is concerned i like giving more room,so here i used bar highs/lows to hide my SL,sometimes it may happen that by keeping SL tight,it hit SL just to see the trade moved in our favour,that's my concern
Why do you like giving more room to trade...sit and ask yourself this question carefully...There is only one place your SL should ever go in a trade - where you are very likely to be proved wrong - that is the whole point of a SL and nothing more.
This practice of using large SL's or illogically placed SL's (not saying yours was) is so common place, I see novices and so called pro's using needlessly large SL's, why, because they either don't understand where they will likely be wrong in a trade and/or they can't psychologically handle the concept of a small SL and such a quick potential loss.
People decrease the value in a trade substantiallyby using larger than needed SL's. My SL on a trade like that would have been no more than 25 pips max.
i go to college,so sometimes im not on screen,so at times it happens that i may end up taking full loss.usually i take partial losses.(in this trade i took partial loss)
Yes, I think you managed the trade well and for good objective reasoning in terms of why and where you exited. Though the fact price couldn't breakout of the FLR at the 2nd approach after the initial rejection on the LTF's would have given me cause for concern about the strength of the breakout, but not sure if you can watch the LTF's - but I like the reasoning behind your exit.
- #1,338
- Apr 17, 2012 10:18am Apr 17, 2012 10:18am
Hi Fx7877,
I guess you could say that there was some sort of imbalance before the area LJ marked where buyers overcame sellers (the area I have highlighted in yellow on LJs previous charts), but as you have also pointed out this imbalance is not nearly as prominent as the area of the source of the massive 5 minute bar marked in purple where demand clearly came in really strong and thus this would be the first area I would expect demand to come in again. Furthermore I had a daily SR marked at the 0.9932 level which for me provided further reason...
This is exactly how I view the setup...I'm looking at S/D imbalance zones and that zone was a clear one and was where the decision to have that huge move higher was made and thus for me this represents the first possible area to expect demand on the retrace.
The origin of the whole move was of course lower and it is feasible price could react there and form a double bottom on that timeframe but the zone above the type of S/d zones I'm looking for when taking LTF trades based on S/D alone.
LJ, thanks for your insight. So when we have 2 zones located pretty closed to each other like in this case, we don't necessarily take the lower one (for buy orders), but take the one with the bigger imbalance? Sometimes I see zones quite close together and I wonder if this is IT or the next one
