Auction Market Theory and Market Profile

CISCO says, that AMT is no method meant for making a prognosis/forecast of price movement.

At the same time they acknowledge, that when one places an order, it is kind of forecasting.


Trading will ever be some kind of forecasting.


Since we simply can not know with 100% accuracy where price will go next moment, every trade reflects in the end our prognosis.


So question is: do I realy need to have 40 topics to be analyzed in order to make a decision of buy or sell or stay away?

anyway - nice trading results in your trading explorer

Its an algorithmic form of analysis. This data can all be worked out on a spreadsheet or creating a program. That's what it is is designed to do. The data performed by these calculations, can be attained with one or 2 clicks of a mouse in about 5 seconds. Not rocket science. Your brain might not be able to work it out. But mine can. volume profile does not tell you who's in control, buyers or sellers. Volume at price can not tell you how well we are facilitating trade. Volume profile does not tell you how much long term participation is involved, and where. Of course you cant figure this out. Its way to complex for someone who can only trade patterns. The point is that what ever it is that you do, it has nothing to do with either MP analysis or AMT analysis. Its Cisco's opinion as well as the CME who holds a lease to use the meta data to produce TPOs. So when we are talking MP & AMT there's only one form of analysis. This is supported by Theory.

To try to say that what you do is somehow related to AMT & MP is a joke. None of this has anything to do with you & your volume profile. You aren't performing any kind of analysis your trading "pictures"..............

No you cant, EOD analysis needs "cleared volume" data as a variable for analysis. Its stadegy is using that data as a plan to trade the following day, using the previous days data for entries. That is the MP methodology's way of doing things, it belongs to CME and it is copywritten. Its designed for a market containing a daily close. You cant trade MP in the same in a 24h market.

no I did not, as long as this is not the CME the TPO's on the chart aren't called "MP". I said you needed "3 days of TPO data". CME doen't acknowledege or use multi-day data. So to use multi-day TPO's to form one distribution of TPO's, is not "MP", it's using a different "methodology" different way of organizing & analyzing data. AMT is the methodology to do this'

I never did I say you can use volume in Forex it doesnt exist.

In a tick based market a TPO chart is a "meta profile", a TPO chart in a cleared volume market is a "MP" profile'


That statement is an Oxymoron. Volume data is not used as "value" area in a meta profile, its made up of TPO's.

You Sooooo desperately want some kind of justification for your use of volume at price (tick volume profile), when neither MP or AMT have nothing to do with volume at price at all. In all this data shared NOT ONCE, MP or AMT is said to have anything to do with volume at price. In all literature it says TPO's are the proxy for Volume.
I think everyone here is aware of this. What you do with a tick volume profile is in no way shape or form, MP or AMT related. If you arent analyzing TPO's, it doesnt relate to either one. And has no place here.........................Im tired of repeating myself
Im through with this discussion, Im sure others can read for themselves and will form their own opinion. Its only you who so desperately wants justification for your trading a volume profile.
I dont need to justify what I do, but if I did, its been tested supported by theory, and well documented.....

OK, I will stop responding soon, since it gets meaningless, since you are not able to reflect.......

Quick first question: to obtain the data by two clicks with a mouse in 5 seconds, I think I have to buy their paid services, right? LOL

Did you read the part, where I wrote about the difference between a VPO derived volume profile and and TPO derived market profile? Have you read the part where I told you, what you have to do when you want to analyse the VPO data in Steidlmeyer way? No? So read and re-read again.

Have you noticed, that I, for my analysis, give a shi! about that, what CISCO or CME says or sell?

There are many ways to skin a cat or to use data. CISCO's or CME's ways are only two of it.

I give a shi! about that, what you think what I am doing. I told you from the beginning, that I "mainly" use the data for getting volume based S/R-zones.

But that has nothing to do with the whole fuss you try to make here, since I am well able to understand and perform AMT-analysis. I have read the books as well as the material CISCO or others provide.

Is it me or you, who did not understand and acknowledge, that "Market Profile" is Steidlmeyers trademark for his TPO-curves, and that with Market Profile is not meant a form of AMT? You take a MP to perform an AMT-analysis.

LOL

That is the MP methodology's way of doing things, it belongs to CME and it is copywritten

again: a MP is only the TPO curve and the associated mathematics (value area, POC etc.)

it is not the AMT-analysis



And for the rest what you wrote:

yeah, keep on confusing the things and making them more complicate than they are. Keep on trying to say that I am the one who has no clue.


Ask yourself the question, why SVengralla got confused and need to ask you the question regarding MP's, TPO's and AMT, and why you answered wrong.



I am not only tiered from this discussion, now I am bored, too

LOL again

I gave information where you can find studies about tick-volume in Forex and the use of it a proxy for volume wth an accuracy of over 90%, but you keep on singing the old song

Yes, others can read by themselves: http://www.cisco-futures.com/marketprofile_history.html





The first publication of the Tick-TPO or Meta-Profile value area was in the Alumni Letter of the Market Logic School (owned by Steidlmayer and Koy) in April 1987. When we discussed the concept with them, they adamantly held out that value could only come from volume, but they published our article anyway. Subsequently, Steidlmayer is quoted in the CBOT Market Profile Manual (1991), p33: " What Steidlmayer calls the TPO value area is defined by..."; without attribution. Likewise, Mind Over Markets. 1990, has a section on TPO Value-Area Calculation, p 333, again without attribution. One reason for the acceptance of the Meta-Profile is that Market Profile value could only be found for the CBOT cleared volume data, from the LDB, about 15 percent of the world's futures trading. The reason for their non-attribution of the source of the Meta-Profile value area is unknown.

Currently, it is not clear if anyone is using Market Profile patterns for trading. In fact, it appears likely that few traders are even using the volume based 'value area' from Market Profile, either. The fact is that quote services who offer a 'Market Profile' service are producing reports for markets that do not release volume at price. It appears likely that the Meta-Profile is the product the customers receive.

Figure 1 is an LDB report showing trading at price by the four member classifications. Figure 2 is the Market Profile derived from the LDB report, a LDB - Volume profile. The value area for the LDB - Volume is found from the volume in column 2 of figure 2. The LDB - Volume report requires LDB data, of course, and is limited to exchanges which produce that data. Since LDB data is not released in real time, LDB - Volume profiles and value areas are not available in real time either.

Figure 3 is the same delivery as figure 2, with the profile built following the Tick - TPO/TPT methodology. The profile is somewhat smoother than Figure 2 due to the continity of the TPO/TPT sets for each letter. The value area is calculated from TPO/TPT counts, replacing the volume used in Figure 2. The TPO/TPT value area is somewhat different from the volume value area. This difference is a natural result of the differing methodologies; at times such differences may be large. Tick - TPO/TPT methodology is applicable to all auction markets that generate ticks. By the same token, the Tick - TPO/TPT method is available in real time.

Figure 4 is the half-hour tick bars for figure 3. The tick bars match figure 3 exactly, as they should. Figure 2 does not match so well. Since Figure 2 is a result of the clearing process, there can be differences from outtrades, wrongly reported trading times from floor traders and the like. Also, CBOT does not provide continuity between letters, listing TPOs only at prices traded, e.g. at 3222 no K is posted although K period is shown being traded on both sides of 3222. The lack of continuity can be striking in fast moving markets, creating an odd looking profile that is hard to analyze.

Yes, if you are using meta-profiles in tick-data based markets, you use TPO's as proxy for volume, and so you calculate the value area out of the TPO's


When you use LDB-data, you use volume data. And so the value area is calculated by using the volume data



When you accept, that in Forex tick-volume is a very good proxy for volume (with accuracy of more than 90%), you can calculate the value area analogously to the LDB-data, by simply using the tick-volume as volume.


In order to perform an AMT-analysis, it is not necessary to follow the rules or guidelines of CISCO or CME (because, it is only their opinion, and there are many valid ways to skin a cat (even mathematical/statistical valid ways).


So the discussion evolved from my 3 SD statement, to comparing my trading system to CISCO's one (or yours), to definitions of ATM and MP, further to calculation of value areas, the use of tick-data meta-profiles or volume based LDB-data, the confusion of trading system/analysis (AMT) with MP, the discussion, if MP or ATM can be applied to Forex markets and on and on.

We have straighted out many things, that should be clear now for the readers, we again have advertised CISCO by linking even more material here (just joking), but all YOU have not done is to proof my original statement about the 3 SD wrong.


When ever the ice in the discussion got thin for you, you shifted simply the topic a bit. Very nice........

The “cti commercial” data is/was used to perform analysis “outside the chart” not for actual “building” of the chart . The chart is still made of TPO’s. NOT volume at price. That cti data is not used for viewing the profile. Unless you can isolate, commercials volume, specs, public. This data is only available from the CME and its useless in forex. If you cant isolate the different classes of CTI traders at price, the volume data has no use. But everything to do with it is used outside of the “TPO profile” as analysis. you can see this from his post. The profile is still comprised of TPO’s!!!! not volume at price

IT IS NOT USED AS “VOLUME AT PRICE” as Infinitus soooooooooooooooooo desparately wants to hear, “TPO’s “ are still used to build the profile. And being that its CME exclusive, that form of analysis is canot not be used in Forex. It is a NON ISSUE HERE. This CTI data is not used “at price” to build the profile as Infinitus sooooooo desparately wants to hear. And anyway, that data has been discontinued from Cisco anyway, found to be unimportant…………………………………..Infinitus wants to justify his use of “Volume at price” to build a profile. This has nothing to do with “TPO’s at price” or “TPO profiles” used for MP or AMT.

Are you really that dense?

No where I have said that they, when using LDB-data, do build the TPO's as kind of VPO. I told that they, in this case, calculate the value area out of the volume data

And where is the mathematical problem, to calculate the VPO directly, when anyway using volume for determining the value area. You have only to switch a bit your way of analysing. But since you simply have not the slightest clue about mathematics and statistics, not to mention non-linear analysis, since you are only able to repeat but not to reflect CISCO's findings, all discussion with you is a futile attempt and will lead to nowhere.



I told, they calculate the value area with volume data!!! Do you get it now????

Come on, you can not be so stupid as to not knowing what you are doing here. Again you are confusing things. Nowhere I have stated, that my way of analysing the things is the way CISCO does it. I have made it clear from the beginning. And yet you keep on insisting, that I use VPO.

And again and again you are arguing, that MP's can only be analysed the way CISCO or CME approaches it.

LOL And because of CISCO found some volume related data to be unimportant, you think it has to be unimportant for others. Have you thought about the fact, that the volume data would have cost around 500 USD per month per customer, and CISCO simply declared volume to not be sooooo important in order to not lose its whole customers? Do you believe in Santa Claus?

But anyway: also I stated several times here, that most of the time the difference between a TPO-generated value area is not much different than the value area calculated using the volume data or VPO's.

But you keep on insisting that I have no clue about what I am doing, have no clue about what AMT and MP stands for etc.


It is really funny: MzVega can simply not understand, that I can talk perfectly AMT, MP etc. in the way Steidlmeyer et.al used it, but doing in my very own trading something different (which in the first place should not compromise the discussion here, but MzVega chose to do so).


BTW: have you found a way to proof me mathematical invalid with the 3 SD thing the discussion started?

BTW: do you still feel comfortable with the answer you gave Svengralla regarding the AMT/MP issue?

I simply had to go back to my first replay, to re-check what it was all about

Here we go:


LOL, there was nowhere the mentioning of a volume profile, and I made it clear, that it was not a MP/AMT approach but all about a pure statistical probability play


I would like to advise everyone who is interested to re-read the whole fuss again in order to get the idea back, what this whole fuss was all about.

On the following chart,
Light blue = VPO
dark grey = TPO
I do not see much difference between TPO and VPO. In fact I would trust more VPO, because it contains volume information.

Sometimes I hate to argue with my woman because she often firmly believes what the internet says.

yep, the difference is most of the time tiny


for me it is more or less meaningless, what the people use to obtain their value areas, if they use a TPO profile or a VPO profile.

When you go the CISCO AMT route, you take the meta-profiles with tick-based TPO data and follow the route they do advise

When you use tick-volume derived VPO profiles in Forex, you have to perform the auction market analysis a bit different than that what CISCO regards the best way. Simple as that, but I was told that there are people out there, who have only read the bible and nothing else.

And then there are the people who give a "you know what" about AMT, who only look at the market profiles and look for S/R zones.

Then there are the people who look mainly, where price is relative to POC or Vah/VaL and make trading decisions about that.

Then I know some people, who are only interested in knowing, where market left over some virgin POC's

And when I think a bit longer about it, I will certainly find some ways more.


Each and every of the mentioned methods has its pros and cons and limitations. And when you know your stuff/system, you can deal with it.


Really strange that one has to argue about that simple stuff for days. Or was someone told, that in order to speak we have to use each and every letter of the alphabet?

Geez Markus,

You are sure flexing now...

But are you really this dense?

Would seem to me that you have your little group of Club members, but yet feel the need to come here and start shit with somebody else.

She has explained her findings very clearly and continues to work with others, like minded, and without adding anything, or switching up a bit...

You apparently are the one who can simply not GRASP the concept.

Not to mention, I see MzVega TE up, tripping real funds...

Kinda kicks ass on your nothingness.

So, Bitch...

Why not put up or shut up?

This thread is obviously of no value to you but an outlet for your weak comprehension. Why not stick to your little thread, and your little group of followers and leave others who want to work with Vega, alone?

Or are you so insecure in your manhood that you cannot believe prosperity through means that you simply fail to comprehend? Which, I think we both know is what the real deal is..

Before you start to throw the word TROLL around, why not go back and read a few of your posts...

Pointing that finger at anybody else after this performance, well...let's just say it...is really the pot calling kettle, black.

Amen Hotep brother !

I've replaced the word "Overlay Demand Curve" to "Merged Profile" as some think "Overlay Demand Curve" is something to purchase………………………………….

Intra-day Trading with the Tick Based Profiles

Donald L. Jones, March 14, 1990

Copyright Donald L. Jones, all rights reserved

Day Trading With Profiles

The introduction of "Market Profile" in 1985 marked the start of a new chapter in auction market analysis. For the first time a market analyst/trader could use value as a parameter (usually the dominant parameter) in trading decisions. "Market Profile" value comes from trading data at the Chicago Board of Trade in the form of an end-of-day report of cleared volume, listing who on the floor created the volume at each traded price. CBOT/CME is unique in releasing these data. While a signal advance, "Market Profile" lacks in scope (CBOT only) and time (end-of-day reports only). To fill this void, the author, at CISCO Futures, developed an intra-day methodology for finding value from "tick data". This method, called 'Tick-TPO', is applicable to all markets with ticks. Tick-TPO operates from a quoter hook-up continuously within the day. When compared to "Market Profile end-of-day values", the Tick-TPO method gives equivalent results. Value in these determinations is not an exact price, but rather a range of prices (value area is the name coined by the "Market Profile methodology" and is used here as well). Subsequently, the intra-day "Tick-TPO" method was expanded to include "multi-days" (Merged Profile), offering traders value readings in both the short term (intra-day profile) and the longer term (Merged ). For a trader, the advantage of knowing value offers the ability to tell when value is changing. Value moving from stable or balancing to directional gives the trader a signal to trade. When value re-stabilizes (market moves into congestion), the directional move is over.

History

"Market Profile" burst onto the scene in 1985 with the publication of the CBOT Market Profile manual, quickly followed by "Markets and Market Logic" and "Taking the Data Forward", all by J. Peter Steidlmayer and co-authors. The profile concept is to find market value from the cleared volume at price at the end of a trading day. Steidlmayer was a well known exchange member and floor trader at the CBOT. It was generally understood that Steidlmayer had been exceptionally successful in his 20 years on the floor. He credited the "Market Profile methodology" for much of his success.

In Steidlmayer's view, the market behaved like a bell curve (gaussian distribution) with little trading at a day's highs and lows, while most trading occurred at the middle prices. The CBOT began releasing a data base of cleared price/volume (Liquidity Data Bank or LDB) for each delivery each evening after market close. From these data they chose the high volume price, then calculated the upper and lower prices encompassing the central 70 percent of total volume. Value (area) was defined as delimited by those two prices.

Steidlmayer and his co-authors developed a nomenclature for describing markets defined by a bell shaped curve. First the market is divided into half hour periods (mini-days) with each period identified by a letter called a "TPO" (Time Price Opportunity). The letter for 0800 to 0830 is 'A', 0830 to 0900 is 'B' and so on. The days market activity is defined: The first hour of trading is the 'initial balance' (IB). Price beyond the IB is called 'range extension' (RE). Price extremes (highs, lows) with single TPOs are 'tails'. Auction markets are characterized by low levels of trading at extremes and much more activity at middle prices. Hence, the middle prices are "accepted" while the extremes are "rejected". Also identified within the three publications were five day types, the five separate patterns generated in auction markets.

It seemed that all the elements for a trading model were present. With experience one could hope to duplicate Steidlmayer's trading results. Steidlmayer himself became a principal in a training school, CBOT processed the cleared (LDB) data containing the "Market Profile" (end of day), CISCO maintained the data for sale to traders, James Dalton (who sponsored the Market Logic book) initiated a trading company based on "Market Profile", etc.

In the meantime, the author (Jones), at CISCO, undertook to "formalize" the profile methodology. None of the three primary reference works were indexed, so tracking concepts across the three was difficult. Jones' first step was to make the indexes, thus aiding the second step which was to develop a trading manual . Although the completed manual collected and organized the known profile material, it fell short of being a trading guide. Something was missing.

As a sort of desperation measure, Jones decided to develop a computer program that could recognize the five day type patterns as they occurred. A very competent analyst on the CISCO staff, Chris Young, undertook the job of devising a pattern recognition technique that would automatically identify and discriminate between Normal Days, Normal Variation Days, Non-Trend Days, Neutral Days and Trend or Double Distribution Days. The plan was to find the day type and then correlate it with the path the market subsequently followed. The program was a success but the research failed. There appeared to be little or no correlation between a day type and what followed. Again, something was missing. Further study led to the understanding that the one-day profile is inadequate to define a market. This was the "aha" moment, when it was realized that the missing element is the market's condition prior to the day being traded. That is, a market in balance will behave differently from one that is moving directionally. This (now) obvious and elementary fact led to the development of the "Merged Profile methodology" for finding market condition.

Day Trading in the Real World

Two cases of market condition are important to the trader: first is the change in value that signals the onset of a directional market. The trader who can recognize a value change has an edge in entry over the one who cannot. Obviously one must know the current/previous value in order to recognize a change. In general, value can only be known in a stable, balancing market. Balance itself, takes some time to become apparent following the end of a directional move. This knowledge led us at CISCO to develop the "Merged Profile", for balance recognition on a variety of time scales.

The second case is on the other end of the trade, that point at which a directional market makes its change into a non-directional, congesting market. The time-frame for such change can be quite short, but is more usually of the order of an hour or more. The profile is the tool for this job, but an end of day "Market Profile" from the cleared LDB is hardly quick enough. Needing timing within the day, we turned to the tick data from a quoter. In place of the cleared volume used by "Market Profile", we used the "tick data" from our quoter and summed it. Instead of "TPOs" from "cleared volume data", our measure is TPTs or 'That Price Ticked'. We named this the methodology 'Tick-TPO Profile'. We used "TPO" instead of "TPT" because "TPO" was commonly used and changing to "TPT" would just confuse the reader.

Responsive Trading

The directional market of the previous paragraph has its onset with a price breakout from a balanced market. This is often called an 'initiating' trade. Trading within a balanced market, e.g selling near the top of a balance or buying near the bottom of a balance is called 'responsive trading'. Responsive trades tend to have low potential and limited risk. While the low risk feature is attractive to many traders, our research indicates responsive trading has approximately half the potential of initiative trading and the reward to risk ratio is worse than for breakout trades. We will not further discuss responsive trading in this article.

Applying Tick-TPO Methodology

"Tick-TPO methodology" is different from "Market Profile" in parameters measured (ticks vs cleared volume), time frame (real time vs end of day) and markets covered (all those tick based vs just cleared LDB). Lastly, "Market Profile" analysis uses the bell curve in various ways, none of which is done in the Tick-TPO methodology. Clearly, tick data in real time is more prone to error than "cleared volume". But ticks are timely and the error rate on quoters is quite low. "Market Profile" value focuses on a single point, the high volume price; while Tick-TPO is averaged over the ensemble of recorded price-time pairs. The tradeoff is that with "Tick-TPO" (really, as noted, Tick-TPT) we are essentially reading the market in real time. Further, this methodology can be applied to markets other than CBOT. Nevertheless, "Tick-TPO" is much more general, applying to all markets that release quotes. Further, as an intra-day device, "Tick-TPO" performs analyses not possible with end-of-day data. For instance, Tick-TPO is useful in locating congestion as it is evolving.

By the end of 1988 the "Market Profile" craze was beginning to fade. Those who expected profile trading to be the end-all be-all were disappointed (Steidlmayer had said the profile offered the trader an 'edge', but many expected more). Our findings that the profile provided an incomplete market picture were confirmed by the trading results of many traders. Market Logic School was closed. Steidlmayer was employed by Commodity Quote Graphics, Dalton Capital Management had terminated trading and CISCO's LDB customer base was eroding. A vociferous group of 'anti-profilers' had arisen (centered, it seemed, at the CME). These debunkers were mostly technical chartists. "Market Profile" techniques, had they delivered all that was expected, would have put the chartists out of business.

The Current Situation with Profiles

"Economists" paint auction markets as a tug-of-war between buyers and sellers, the path Steidlmayer takes as well . "Fundamentalists" like to identify all the factors of supply and demand and then weight them ("if the soybean harvest is 10 percent under the expected, soybean prices will rise 20 cents"). "Fundamentalists" seek intrinsic value (what it is really worth, in spite of the current price). But there are myriads of factors in any market, many totally unknown, and they interact in complicated and non-linear ways. Strictly speaking a mathematical description of a market would be a non-linear, non-homogeneous differential equation with non-constant coefficients. Not knowing all the interactions between the many variables means that such a market equation could not be written nor solved for real world markets. A "fundamentalist solution" is not possible. The "Fundamentalists" failures gave rise to the technical analysts of the 1970's who used "prices" and charts to plot the course of markets. The profile idea sought current "value", what the market viewed as value today, with no mind paid to what value should be sometime in the future. In view of the inability of "Fundamentalists" to define their variables and the consistent failures of the chartists (90 to 95 percent of new traders fail), the only recourse is with the experimental approach, i.e. "the profile".

We will show that the "Tick-TPO profile" combined with the "Merged Profile" provides the trader a consistent, effective way to understand markets. Recent (yesterday) profile value and the previous market balance (multiple days) longer term value give the trader a platform for understanding value and value change. We do not offer the Profile - Merged Profile methodology as a 'trading model' since each trader's timeframe and risk parameters are different. The thrust of profile auction market methodology is market understanding. Traders will behave differently, but all will have the opportunity to trade better if they understand value.

Profiles from Tick Data

In our two 1987 articles we used a format similar to the CBOT "Market Profile" to illustrate the point that the "Tick-TPO" quote data formalism provides essentially the same value area as found from the LDB "Market Profile". In fact, neither method requires the brackets (profile bell shape) to find a value area, since it is just the numbers (volume for Market Profile, TPT counts for the Tick-TPO profile) that are used to calculate value. The actual bell shape of the "Market Profile" was used by Steidlmayer for finding initial balance, range extension, tails and the five auction market patterns. None of the bell shape related items are involved in the Tick-TPO Profile.

Bad, very bad. I can not vomit as much as I would like to do when I read your rubbish and venom you are spitting everywhere.

I give you a definition of troll:

You have not and will not contribute in this thread in any meaningful way. Your presence here is simply caused by the fact, that I am here. And your aim is to cause again trouble and try to paint a bad picture of me.

Last time you did it ended in complete humiliation for you and you were suspended for some time (but not by me).

That is what I call a troll. You are a troll.

Where is your contribution to this thread? Where is your contribution to this discussion? Where is the answer to my question to you, where I have twisted words or made erroneous statements? Where have you laid out, that my statement from the beginning of the discussion (the 3 SD thing) is either flawed and/or mathematically/statistically incorrect?


What has my thread, the members posting there, or my followers have to do with this discussion? Alone that you brought this into this discussion is proof enough of you trolling me.

I have backed up all what I said with links, citation etc. Proof me wrong, troll you are.

The fact, that MzVega has nice results in trade explorer, I acknowledged days ago and told so here. Since you are trolling me, you surly now that so there is no need for me to dig out that link. I do not need the "brilliant" Magix to give honor to whom honor is due.

If you like to play the hobby-shrink here, the best address for you would be a physician who would be able to give you a nice place in one of those houses, where one is familiar with people of your kind.

So again for you troll:

Where is your contribution to this thread? Where is your contribution to this discussion? Where is the answer to my question to you, where I have twisted words or made erroneous statements? Where have you laid out, that my statement from the beginning of the discussion (the 3 SD thing) is either flawed and/or mathematically/statistically incorrect?

So deliver or shut up!

Interesting, thx.

Deliver?

Deliver what?

I am here to learn from Vega, not see you trying to justify your bullshit logic. If I wanted to see that, I'd go to "The Club". But I don't. So, I won't.

I don't actually have to contribute, I just don't want to read your tripe. More Meaningless Rants.

Was really the same before I got suspended on New Years. I wasn't humiliated by you, it was quite the opposite. Where I could conclusively explain a simple market movement, you came up empty with only theories. And probably the only reason you are here pestering Vega is because she too wasn't buying in on your Alien Robots take over market, bullshit either. If memory serves, she not only posted a contradicting claim to yours, but also provided links to back her up.

So Markus...

TROLL MARKUS...

Move along.

Let the rest of us decide by thread who we would like to follow...

This isn't a pissing contest.

For what its worth this thread was the catalyst for my turn around in trading. Also, I have found great value in taking heed to where price is in relation to the POC (Point of control)at the end and beginning of a trading day.........or week or whatever timeframe I am trading off of. Not as a signal but to give me an idea as to whether the market is too short or long and whether a trend day could be in the making. Along with my other filter it really weeds out bad trades.

thanks for the info trendzalore . can i ask what your other indicator is?