Pattern's Chemo-Electric Trading Journal

Mec is okay for handling emotions, but not for reading chart patterns.
rl seems better to do, so that -- since rl is designed to read news into the chart, and when few symbols (such as with forex (vs. companies')) exist, it's perhaps easier to use rl and then throw in typical trading chart devices where rl shows a good place to use one.
Example:



Here, I wrote down the five rl patterns that I use, plus, to right of the vertical line, make-of shapes I rather think of than directly use.



For non-used-with-news, I can just put in the rl patterns to catch a quick in-rl-pattern run. More likely -- as noted above -- , though, the chart's symbol has either a) very heavy trading use and few other symbols to compete with for news, such as forex, or b) extraordinary effect on the life of that chart's symbol by news, as in a smaller and/or heavy seasonal-profit/loss cycles for the company (and thus (sub)industry of that company). To note of the latter, original story of that chart's symbol's company sets the pattern that one compares to later on and becomes a fixed repetition, and/or, depending on the company's size and/or treatment by its investors over time, from a mere single rl pattern -- the order of the rl patterns reveals both the names of them, which is 'flag' (the traditional pattern), 'maybe', stable', 'spike', and 'roll' (also a regular, but here simplified, pattern). For example, I've found 'stable' sitting alone supportively amidst big drug companies, other rl patterns' support for 'flag' around news for a small company making, as I recall, cellphone towers (in 2004, the year I made the chart-reading method ).
This approach became quite interesting, seeing how investors literally treated the company they supported's stories'/y's chart(s). However, my trading capability that one needs separate from interpreting the chart itself was (and, to my knowledge, still is) poor, and I searched for other ways of dealing with the chart. My thought overall in terms of the chart was that if I can't make it with rl patterns in forex, then I can't make it at all, since, as I reasoned, the chart in forex is about money itself, and runs -- theoretically, at least -- 24 hours a day every day, even if many of the world's most-important countries don't participate their types of money in this market.
So I lasted a short time, actual money-wise, in the forex market -- its money handlers being often much more ruthless, and/or its market being very different than the small / in-trouble companies I was used to trading (although, I now recall, the in-trouble ones I went out of my-money trading on, did also have a whole-industry single rl pattern it depended on, too, as does bigger companies and forex symbols -- since apparently, shoving the traditional chart-pattern devices into that chart more often, as per this post's charts shown for an old time in GB/US forex symbol, would've done more good at that time.)
The many types of patterns I've made in my 'GB/US' posts thread before and after the rl-patterns post, they served to further break down for me the idea of what a chart really is, which helped me understand other things in my life (such as mec, and so on even more personally), and I discussed it at this site, in the current post thread. Then I'd return to the aforementioned habit of interpreting practice charts with a new set of chart patterns that the most-considered charts forex money markets' charts are, may work into a good trade for me with.

That brings me to now, a time when I exhausted, for my non-trading applications of time-drawing patterns at least, innovative new chart patterns, and instead, I began recently to focus on summarizing ANY 2(,3)D pattern and its common existence along time (from, so to speak, space). I came up with, this week, a dot -- 'position', as those in math often describe it --, a closed-boundary shape -- 'contain', I may call it, to match its style of naming with dot's --, and, finally, a line of any curvature that is not a closed boundary -- 'direct', in turn for the aforementioned reason.
I haven't found a use of these three shapes, as they are not so much shapes, as organization of all shapes, because the thinking model I created tends to reflect upon space more than time, and thus is the opposite -- and all, since I've included the idea, if not so much, the actuality, of trading charts in making my thinking model -- of the time-dependent nature trading charts are. This is since a trading chart can snap back often, but in space-dependent real life (I've found and/or read/observed about) that objects/animals/etc. experience, one cannot have any chance to snap back from in any case, far more-so than with small companies and their charts.

So maybe I should reflect on how this newer-to-me set of patterns works in forex trading parts. They may have something to do with the traditional chart patterns built into the chart program -- what I meant was, those large-space-coverting ones, such as Gann fan or a big grid making right-angles frames or an echo of aligned curves or, well, etc. (of which I also have a somewhat-reasonable amount of experience (in practice) with), each anchored point or two along time. The chart makes space out of time, so I'm uncomfortable with that notion by simply sticking a filled shape (rectangle,triangle, circle) without further deliberation-about, which are more involved with dividing up space, though I now guess that one could consider a bunch of smaller shapes within such filled shapes as having their own respective life cycle and thus, with respect to the filled shape they're in, having time being first in their stay inside that space that the filled shape contains.
Somewhere along the range of possibilities that this last idea suggests, could exist in a space-prevalent model, but, I think, not in -- as a trading chart is -- a time-prevalent model. So, I must think further with the same and/or similar set of variables this idea has.
Hmmm....

One caveat, which came to me while rewriting post #1 of this thread just now, and that may help to continue this now-opened discussion, is this:
Early on, I did have experience both money-invested and, much more time-wise extensively, practiced, with many forex symbols. I did notice each forex symbol does have its own chart-pattern peculiarities, because its most-(,)money percentage of traders is, in each instance, a different set of traders.
Also, I did experiment with reading news with forex, but neglected to do so -- although, I now recall, came up with some very intensively-influential comparisons between different forex symbols for the impact one currency's news has on other currencies, I also ran into technology problems of keeping up with the market in such a heavy-technology-dependent approach, so I stopped using news in forex, perhaps also due to the influence of me trading for real and before me practice-trading forex charts, the much-heavier impact that the small companies' news had on their charts.

So what am I going to do, to further this idea of space-preferred organization of all shapes (whose range is noted deep into the last post) ?
I could work on news again, to set up how what I understand of it works and then continue from there; or, hmmm, I don't know. Maybe simply fitting into this idea the idea of the traditional big-scale patterns, would help somehow, if at least I include or at least leave room for the each-news-over-all-affected-symbols idea (assuming I'm now only and fully in forex (practice) trading (a concept I went beyond, in the last post, to give the background for rl) ).

Here's a few charts that attempt to explicate such an idea:



This chart is not much different from the last post's set of charts's drawn patterns, in that rl was used extensively with the right-most rl pattern -- the curve --, and the big-organization pattern was derived directly and hand-picked in overall from amongst such a repetitive display of only exactly one rl pattern.
I did trade on the concluding lines of the picture above, and it failed. I felt that there were too many excessive-angle lines to be had, and so elected to ignore the early ones, when it turned out that all I had to do was to increase my perspective's area of consideration and so draw a horizontal line through the middle of all those lines.

I must then try and change my perspective size when such an unadorned rl pattern becomes, also, prevalent in my charts. A way to think of this is, roller language works also on comparing the first and last, or the second and second-to-last, patterns, as well as -- in the second of three ways to organize rl patterns before/after figuring where on a chart they go -- considering one side or other of the middle rl pattern (, as the rl patterns are listed in order in the last post's picture of them, and have always been considered thusly (tho I did mess around with the patterns one doesn't put on the chart -- those to the right of the big vertical line on the picture of rl patterns -- in order to try and capture the rl patterns' basis of existence from how their picture is shaped).
A third use of simply examining the picture of rl patterns in the last post, is how all of the rl patterns may be thought of as defining, in each rl pattern's way, a horizontal level of space (in trading charts' language, price), so that the left side of the middle rl pattern is especially involved in creating such a thing, and the right side of the middle rl pattern overly-assumes a (or more than one) level of space, leaving the middle rl pattern itself to be an anchor for any horizontal levels that may be had, a consideration that may be light with respect to some news and/or typical generalized conduct the chart('s symbol's (company/)currency) typically engages in. This third use of the rl patterns' picture engages every single rl pattern more, pointing to the definition of each pattern and its name (which is somewhat flexible, just as the overall idea of a set of time-prevalent patterns is to a space-prevalent universe).
I'd like to spin off this third use of the rl patterns (numbered so only settably in terms of focussing moreso each time being so along the use's number being higher or lower).
I now make the assumption (which is based on my digestion of various documentaries, books, and my own thoughts (about patterns in my thinking model, and (, with the least weight of consideration with respect to the entire statement I'm about to make,) other things) that space-prevalent universes tend to adjust according to energy, not time, having direction (the third shape in the space-prevalent list of shapes that organize all shapes) being stopped when said energy is stronger or weaker, and, in turn, still and/or active, and, lastly, variant in nature along time. Given this, I must, first, use two horizontal lines to make my potential-energy (money, in trading) trade on the (practice) chart, to contain said energy.

Nature, I reflect, is so fractal -- it's funny in a way, since one's mind's electrical energy is, I read, microscopically designed in grids of boxes, which is quite opposite of such a consideration of nature -- that when one flattens one piece/consideration of nature onto a 2D (two-dimensional) chart, it becomes predictable in some degree, along the path the symbol's two compared variables take meanderally upon that chart, if perhaps predictably if said path is amongst shapes in space one already knows the nature of and thus the reaction those two variables will have if those two variables are pre-trained (that is, having set-manipulation/adjustment of space in a pre-set amount of time) within a space that, for one, has the ability to move itself and manipulate space around it also,
and, for two, -- and, overall, I'm thinking of a person ("a space") doing a task such as cooking a meal (moving objects to cook a food) and thus manipulate space, or I'm thinking of, a piece of news that affects, space-wise, scores of people when they trade money for products and/or affects traders very directly, time-wise
-- those two variables are not pre-trained, but instead, are very unpredictable because there are scores of people (and/or algorithms in a variant amount of time's space (that is, price, in this instance)) interpreting the chart their own way, with or without standardization (that, compared to 'pre-training', does not do a set-manipulation/adjustment, so much as do a possible manipulation/adjustment, thus leaving when one does a manipulation/adjustment more the consideration than that news provides, compared to obvious time and not-so-obvious space consideration (often in trade for money as a leverage in a job of doing so, and thus connecting to the forex currency chart on the opposite side of the range) that two pre-trained variables in the aforetaken side of the range of possibilities takes.

This brings forth the idea of a range between space- or time-prevalent existence that energy, in yet another consideration of it, may have, since it both exists, and thus takes up space, and moves, and thus changes or adjusts space (if one keeps to mind that neutrons or some such thing passing through us continuously and thus being affected to some degree by our (as an example) affecting where they go); interaction adjusts this flow on the side of space, through time. Conclusion: Set, paid-for activities adjust space along paid time, and fractally-different activities adjust time along paid space.

(cont'd from last two posts)



My conclusion, in the last post, was that set, paid-for activities adjust space along paid time, and fractally-different activities adjust time along paid space. Since traders don't get paid for their time while trading, they, as per this conclusion, get paid for the amount of time their money occupies the space within the broker's hold of it
and thus, as per their (assumed) job, the entirety of money being within the amount of time held
on the debit side of credit-debit piece of paper / computer space for that one trader,
and on the credit side of credit-debit piece of paper / computer space that the broker and thus the entire market, on the broker side, owns for that time ("borrowing", in some varieties of the owning with other principles (that, in turn, may be making an exchange that is less time-dependent (and thus potentially worth less, depending on the skill one possesses in making such a path, that is, such a transaction perhaps))) in the form of credit.
This discussion of that conclusion brings up another variable, that of credit and debit, that is, of exchange. In fact, it neatly applies to the one unusual word in that stated conclusion, that of "paid". For, one often is not paid, but loses something instead, the given energy exchanged not giving way to another, and instead making it less worth something it was, before then, used as a leverage, whether or not that energy was contained within or existing as a filled shape that makes its own leverages as it sees fit (such as a person, but, in some ways, also a machine after it's alive and while it's fed).
So life/violence, fed-energy/digestion, and copy/se_ (yes, that) tend to open up how a leverageable shape such as money may create or lose another one or type of one. Leverage = interaction if one considers first the life/violence, fed-energy/digestion, and copy/se_ (yes, that) of each shape on either side of the interaction, and thus how well that leverage -- each side of the interaction having, in total, one leverage -- creates a credit or debit within a certain amount of time and/or space, or perhaps, after a certain amount of time and/or space, in the case of money, that (nature-fractal-infinite)-range shape that everybody wants in one way or another.
Predicting the change in credit or debit is the near-obsession of quite a lot of people, though no-/low-cost caring for given leverages from self and/or others and/or owned/borrowed objects is also a consideration to take.
So +N-(leverage) is the way to go, given those space-organizing shapes I aforementioned. It considers energy as being a shape of another form, such as money or this computer or something else; so, ultimately, that leverage is of energy in some form or another -- and, form is shape, which is then leveraged. Shape is a form of energy. Leverage provides a path for that shape to transmit energy from one place to another, that is, to make that energy into power, after fed-energy/digestion stores energy within said given shape (that is, in turn, with life(/violence) and can / may / recognizes-others' copy(/se_(yes, that again)). So whether or not that shape got life/fed/copied by itself or another shapes, is irrelevant except in terms of energy credit/debit change for that shape.
second conclusion: Leverage is between shapes; energy is the ultimate shape and is thus defined as having a range of credit/debit, that is, +N-; and, a shape, whether in or along space or time, can be categorized as a point (or "dot"), closed-boundary shape, or open-boundary shape.

How / how well that shape leverages energy, that is, converts that energy into power, decides the amount of overall energy -- often, money, which is so fractal / nature-like that it resembles energy, too, though it's often traded in exchanges (which is a neutral form of leverage, where leverage is then a negative(-) - on -positive (+) exchange between shapes, this in order to produce extra energy). Okay, that's another variable, that of "extra energy". Hmmm....

From what I recall of some rule I read/heard from physics, energy cannot be created or destroyed, it simply goes somewhere else. But, well, "extra energy" implies that within a certain area -- that is, a certain shape, however temporary / temporarily-considered it is -- energy went from one shape to another, while that area contains leakable energy so that, eventually in this example, either shape retains the after-interaction exchange's balance of energy between both shapes.
So, the energy stands alone as being less, more, or about the same -- +N-, that is.
Too, one energy may be passed/pathed/leveraged from one place to another, and so leverage-etc. implies a shape that contains energy, that one may call power-shape, since moving energy that is contained/guided along some kind of path and thus leveraged by the source that energy came from,... Source,moving energy, and energy-registering (and thus, to some amount of that energy moved, power-influencing) change in what the source sent the energy toward,
is yet another conclusion one may make.

The three conclusions above --

1. set, paid-for activities adjust space along paid time, and fractally-different activities adjust time along paid space [this later identified as being the range of "xchg" (that is, an exchange; while two shapes may exchange, they may also only interact, thus implying a possible exchange that loops back within each shape to 'register' that energy exchanged, that is, replace on energy for another within the receiving shape)]
   
2. Leverage is between shapes; energy is the ultimate shape and is thus defined as having a range of credit/debit, that is, +N-; and, a shape, whether in or along space or time, can be categorized as a point (or "dot"), closed-boundary shape, or open-boundary shape.
   
3. Source,moving energy, and energy-registering (and thus, to some amount of that energy moved, power-influencing) change in what the source sent the energy toward

-- data and thus, to some extent, information, is a dot/point,
while the area is formed more in the sense of an open-boundary shape since it acts as a transference of this data(/info) from one place to another
,and the other place then may retain that data(/info) and thus create more energy within its boundary.

Because the three organizing shapes are space-oriented and roller language's patterns time-oriented,
making vertical patterns on the trading chart would be sensible,
and the traditional big-space patterns (Gann fan, rectangles grid, echo curves, and so on), if and only if measured up and down in a single point along time's horizontal axis, then have a place to be at a 2D point or so chosen to be significant enough to anchor that big-space pattern.
This, in turn, invalidates the very last chart picture above, since I only considered the lines I drew on that chart in their collective sense and thus overwhelmed myself with information and thus too much energy -- instead of one piece of information, as a traditional big-space pattern would usually be --, and this led to my truncating ....

Okay, I continued this conversation of sorts at another place, because it involves rather complex symbolification that already contain the ideas I brought forward above. Yet, I arranged those ideas between strings of logic, above, that in this other place, I reached a conclusion for:
..."i/o(nrg,xchg), energy being a shape and xchg being both shape and time, energy thus a trade and xchg the line on that chart of the trade (for ex.)."
This means, that one enters and exits a trade with a certain amount of energy -- in this case, money -- one exchanges after a certain amount of time for +N- amount of said money. Thus, energy1 xchg energy2; thus, xchg is both shape and time, I now reason. So, entry and exit through a given boundary -- the broker being the between-entity at that boundary around the (forex,other trading market of a ) (un (which implies there's a way around the broker to trade, which there is, if one then uses another point in the range of xchg that the first conclusion of the bulleted list above implies) bounded shape.
I stand corrected:
"i/o(nrg,xchg)" implies it creates a separate chart, one often unnoticed in trading, representing the exchange of a trader with the market to get the trader's money into the market. At the same time, 'xchg' (exchange, that is) implies it must be done twice, for the +N- - changed amount of energy (that is, money in this case) from point A to point B along time. 'nrg' (that is, energy), in going both inside and outside a boundary, is too.... No, wait...'xchg' too implies energy, the first point in a 2D ( , )'ing, that is, the x axis,
is alREady a shape, that of implying infinity-1 (the next one of the) shapes existing in potential/past for versions of that said shape,
the exchange, that is, the y axis, then implying the real possibility and thus from one state to another of that shape but only considering the energy required therein and not how the state is.

So the conclusion is that the shape, or its representative space-organizing shape on the x axis, is ... hmmm... really exists at one point along time,
and, in addition, that same shape only measures yet may or may not be that particular condition of that shape over a greater or lesser amount of time, as being that certain way on the y axis. Thus, it holds that "i/o(nrg,xchg)" is valid. It also holds that, since nrg cannot disappear, only be exchanged from one .... No, it's shape containing energy, since energy only moves along time from one place to another; so, energy must be measured for whatever shape is to be measured on the y axis. So, "i/o(nrg,xchg)" is invalid. A valid way to put it is "i/o(shape,xchg)", where "xchg" measures the change of that shape from condition A to condition B. Only the problem is, time -- or available energy, if you will, though a simple one-direction measure along a single axis (axis x,) would be impractical -- then, to continue with yet another idea of several ideas in a row, it's not "i/o", it's "xchg" that is the variable at hand; that is, i/o=exchange.
You end up with two absolutes, energy and time. Time is traditional, too-- It's primarily put at/on the x axis. So, energy gets the y axis: This implies that that energy is measured within an unnamed shape that needs it measured. So, it's much easier to put a shape that .... to measure a shape's change along time is to measure its amount of (potential) energy it contains over time, so while the new "xchg(time,nrg)" this implies does mean that "xchg" can be substituted with "i/o" when it is through the bound of said shape.
Conclusion :

xchg(time,nrg)
, where
xchg is exchange at i/o of a bound,
and nrg is an energy of any shape with energy in it

I guess, since this is all I got to do thinkin'-wise ( :O ),
I'd better tie it into trading fairly cleanly.

The chart is time * price. Time is self-identifiable. Price, though, is not, in this case.
Price is the amount of money being measured. Money is very fluid, and so while it does contain rather than equal energy, the concept of "price" is such that it is defined in a dictionary as being a change in the amount of money one needs to exchange for obtaining one object/service/etc. ( -- thus, it being one side of the range of -- well, I might as well copy to here that 'of ....' -- set, paid-for activities adjust space along paid time, and fractally-different activities adjust time along paid space . Price, on the y axis of a regular trading chart, identifies "paid-for" as well as, say, "paid-to", either party of the exchange being ignored, and, instead, only the amount of energy -- that is, price, here -- being exchanged is measured.
The nice thing is that one can make a function out of the variable time, the variable energy or its substituting shape, or even the exchange. Maybe, though, I should be placing 'shape' at "xchg",
that is, do this -- shape(time,nrg) --
so one point along x axis (and y axis) can cleanly be compared with another. So, any exchange from one to another condition (as measured on the y axis as an amount of (potential (to-(leverage and thus)make)) energy of the shape over time is thus redoable as 'cover' words for time and/or energy AND/or shape.
So, there's the conclusion:

shape(time,energy)
, where multiple points along this chart measure the change in condition of the shape being considered.
All sorts of things can substitute for any one of the three variables. This not being a function, math-wise, ... Hmm, the shape must be the ... hmmm, I'm trying to convert shape(time,energy) into a function and thus, for instance, a chartable shape. That seems necessary to then use a trading chart. Hmmm.. I'd better look this one up, because, although I recently went over the basic math stuff, I apparently missed this one: I'm used to f(x)=y, and then how x and y combine in a formula. Hm...

I found a site that, for free, plots f(x,y) . It turns out, for those few that are as dumb as I (can) be,
that f(x,y) maps on the third dimension, NOT two dimensions. So then I gotta ask,
why the heck doesn't most -- and I did run across a 3D trading chart for a company-stocks broker, one time; or, maybe it was a gimmick somebody was selling at the time -- charting programs draw their traditional what-I-call big-shape patterns (Gann fan, rectangles-grid, echoing curves, etc.) in 3D? Then one could write ...

Okay, maybe I'm being a little goofy.

shape(time,energy) , though, does stand as a functional way to think of things. I just need clear examples of it to feel comfortable actually using it any time.

Hmm.

Okay, I's goofy a bit, but I did find somethin' cool (to me, at least). Yes, when I initially got into graphing functions, just now, I finally figured how to graph a circle in 2D -- Not much else, since I just moved a formula I found to a free function grapher.
Here's the links that I this time-around I found and messed around with --
free 2D function graphers (that I messed around with on the first go, and when I finally found the function for a circle this time somewhere here) -- 1, 2 -- and 3D function graphers and what they call contour-map function graphers (that I just now fiddled with) -- both at 3 , and more fancy function graphers here.

Bored, yet? Me, too.
Okay, shape(time,energy) . And I'm not from Missouri, ha -ha. Anyway, as I typed a post or two ago, one stretches a traditional big-sized pattern over the trading chart to increase the amount of time, but not necessarily the amount of energy, to consider. Given this statement, then if one uses such a device, then the more shape(time,energy) points along the y axis that one represents, the less process-able the chart becomes in one's brain, as the last post noted. The more shape(time,energy) points along the x axis, though, is commonly considered to be of great value, at least if there ain't no super-big move that's gonna knock you down flat in a trade you have upon it at that time.
So I wanna try trading the more shape(time,energy) points along the y axis approach to also get an average-middle horizontal line on, say, that last chart picture in the last post.

Wait, before that, I did find the 2D circle function link.

Okay, I got it now.
This idea about averaging-out what shape(time,energy) points along the y axis that I drew in the last chart picture,
panned out, so that I ended up constructing something as viable as those charts I posted about five or six posts ago:

(skipped a little chart here, maybe an hour or two; it doesn't affect the overall chart motion)

-- It then appears that it's effective to be thinking the way the use of the idea of shape(time,energy) maps out the traditional big-sized patterns (either near-automatic or hand-drawn with a simpler drawing device (straight line, etcetera) after finding a good place to put it/'em at with rl patterns, is a both effective and systematic way to trade (which reminds me, and has for a little bit of these writings), of the programmer who posted a while ago. I respect him being a programmer, but, at the time, I was too not-ready -- as most of my posting indicates -- for such a thing. So anybody want to program this -- oh, well, there's probably just-as-good or better systems to trade a chart drawn-up by. So, then, maybe the reasoning and/or conclusion I typed in within the past several posts will help somebody.

Anyway, I guess I revisited my method:
some of the dynamics of how to use the shape(time,energy) function-proposin' grapher are above,
and the rl is documented around the hand-drawn picture a couple of posts ago.

Okay then, 'til later.

Okay, I hope whoever read all that writing about a 'shape(time,energy)' 3D function, found it entertaining.
It doesn't, though and of course, apply to trading.
So, I still keep the same rl + traditional big patterns (Gann fan, grid, etcetra) method.

I did think of another metaphor for trading,
this one more to-the-point of using rl patterns in specific.
This way of thinking of the rl patterns allows for a much-more coherent reasoning from regular-sized to super-big one-side rl patterns, the latter being, as shown in the chart pictures below, possibly selected by one or more other super-big one-side rl patterns, instead of regular-sized rl patterns.
Note that I started (, due to, at my estimate, the human body using in terms of

1. triangle: grasping outside-of-self (or other surroundings)
2. square: going a decent distance doing the same thing (some energy travelling its full distance, for instance), to align with gravity or something with a similar effect
3. circle: dealing with tiny shapes that undergo change

From this, I got the following revision of the roller language method of drawing patterns onto a trading chart:

1)
Another way to think of the rl patterns, left to right, is as a :

1. outer-spike (with triangle to set new level)
2. triangle/square
3. square
4. spike then/as-part-of a curve
5. curve

2)
Here is the rl patterns and, to the right of the tall vertical line shown, the building patterns:

The intention, in order from left to right of the rl patterns:

1. make a new level by establishing it with the triangle atop the dramatic vertical jump to it
2. try to make a new level, its try somewhat failing and instead going some toward being a square
3. stabilize level around being a square
4. a-bit try to go for a level with a spike, then simply returning to an ongoing continuance of consecutive and opposed curves
5. a curve, that is one of a continuing flow of curves (that looks like a wave, say)

These descriptions of intent for each rl pattern may be way off what is actually happening,
but may, as the description for each rl pattern, contribute to when to include that rl pattern on one's trading chart.


3)
as a way to feel more confident in simplifying rl into these simple shapes (since it is humans that choose how the trading chart is made):

1. triangle (first two rl patterns)
2. square (middle rl pattern)
3. circle (the two rl patterns on the other side of the middle rl pattern)

to, at times, abbreviate a fair number of rl patterns (without dipping into what patterns modified them):

Lastly, one can build one of the rl patterns by adding the simple shape to a building shape,
in a way that gets that rl pattern's intent on existence:
the building shapes -- those to the right of the tall vertical line in the hand-drawn picture several posts ago --
are

1. straight line
2. period
3. empty space

.

Here, a circle, which is a big pattern that represents the right side of the middle rl pattern,
goes around a building shape, that of a straight line:

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


The old charting method is here:



"
shape [time,energy] -- rl and traditional big-sized patterns


I practice-trade, so be aware of the implications before reading this thread.

Roller language is what I use to weed-out good places to place a traditional large-area chart pattern such as Gann fan, a grid of squares (or simpler horizontal (and/or vertical) lines), or echoing curves. I introduced the concept on this site in the one post I discussed it in detail, this post being in my GB-US thread; then, most-recent, I restated and added to that concept in post #961 of this thread. There-after, I continued to modify rl beyond the central patterns that roller language ("rl") uses.
The description of the method is worked through in several posts after this, because of my having difficulty fitting in where traditional big-sized patterns would go; so, one must add the first and last posts' information and also the last post's ending remarks and all of the chart pictures in those and in the several posts before #961 in order to get a fairly clear idea of what my current practice-trading charting method is.
"


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

The new charting method is here, as reprinted from post#1:




"
Here is the roller-language (rl) patterns and, to the right of the tall vertical line shown, the building patterns:


1)
Another way to think of the rl patterns, left to right, is as a :

1. outer-spike (with triangle to set new level)
2. triangle/square
3. square
4. spike then/as-part-of a curve
5. curve

2)
The intention, in order from left to right of the rl patterns:

1. make a new level by establishing it with the triangle atop the dramatic vertical jump to it
2. try to make a new level, its try somewhat failing and instead going some toward being a square
3. stabilize level around being a square
4. a-bit try to go for a level with a spike, then simply returning to an ongoing continuance of consecutive and opposed curves
5. a curve, that is one of a continuing flow of curves (that looks like a wave, say) going the same way it's been

These descriptions of intent for each rl pattern may be way off what is actually happening,
but may, as the description for each rl pattern, contribute to when to include that rl pattern on one's trading chart.
Also:
Because one of the first and fifth, and also second and fourth, resembles the other in this pairing through how much it commits to showing how much, for itself, the higher or lower level of price is at that set of candles (note: originally, I used those haikon (spelling?) - type candles to make the method, but found, while at this site, that regular candles work as well) within the rl pattern concerned. Thus, I will often try and find the other side of that pairing, as if to then find how the chart rolls; or at least, if I find one, then if the other appears, I can consider, often, that both together cancel each other out, because of their equivalent nature.
As well:
The rl patterns work in size and direction.

3)
as a way to feel more confident in simplifying rl into these simple shapes (since it is humans that choose how the trading chart is made):

1. triangle (first two rl patterns)
2. square (middle rl pattern)
3. circle (the two rl patterns on the other side of the middle rl pattern)

to, at times, abbreviate a fair number of rl patterns (without dipping into what patterns modified them):

Then, one can build one of the rl patterns by adding the simple shape to a building shape,
in a way that gets that rl pattern's intent on existence:
the building shapes -- those to the right of the tall vertical line in the hand-drawn picture several posts ago --
are

1. [both straight lines and curves are assumed to exist, and thus not shown in the picture]
2. period
3. empty space

In conclusion, one can

1. a) leave the simple shapes as they are,
2. b) build an rl pattern
3. c) make a traditional big pattern --

1. triangle (Gann fan)
2. square (grid)
3. circle (some kind of echoing off one period)

​.


The rl-pattern chart pictures in posts #961-5 are still okay, if not the text around them (as the text was me working up the charting method shown above).
They give good examples of, for instance, how one can build an rl pattern or several of them to isolate where to put a traditional big pattern.

To include news in the rl charting method:

Note also that this method, in stock trading, takes on a whole new life (so to speak),
since a(t least a) small-company stock can create from its initial opening of its all-time chart, a set of rl patterns that set a story of how to interpret its chart. Then, as the chart goes along with the company's development and thus different news affect the company's stock's chart, one rl pattern or a different set or a completely-different set of rl patterns may develop from how the company apparently is fairing in the world.
Roller language translates more like the more-basic roller-language method shown above,
in the larger companies/corporations' stock charts, and in various basic-supply symbols such as forex;
however, if a market-wide happening occurs, such as a physical strike upon where those who trade the market depend heavily on or on a major change in the market overall,
then a whole group of stocks will take on the same rl pattern, because of this same news affecting them all.
"


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

Yes, this is a bit more comprehensive a method than one seems to need,
but if one wants to trade news in forex with this method,
then going this far in the explanation -- and I've been trading since 1996, missing mid-2002 to early-2004, only trading forex for real a couple of months before joining Forex Factory, and trading only in practice and only in forex from about the point I joined www.forexfactory.com. Yes, I lost two big bunches of money over a long period of time trading real money before and after the 2001/2 stock-market crash; but in early 2004, I used my second wave of real money to apply myself to understanding the market at full throttle, coming up with the roller-language charting method. At the time, I still did not believe in, and thus did not use except in study of the market separately, the roller-language charting method, because I tend to think of things as me needing to figure the entire picture of what's going on, first. So now, with this post, I have done so. As well, concerning the reliability of my saying that these rl patterns include language --that is, news and story -- in the chart, is that I have a BS in English (and a fair bit of math); I never used it alone in a paid field (though yes, continued to use it in my everyday life), and it took much longer than most people to make, but I believe it served as good background for when, more than a dozen years later, I made the groundwork for the rl method's news side.

I have a particularly-good example of this, from the rl-pattern method's now fairly-standardized (if not -written) definition:
"
As well:
The rl patterns work in size and direction.
" .



In the fourth chart picture, I interpreted the triangle part of the first rl pattern as having a little of a directional flavor to it, that is in this case, upward. I changed the space between and size of all candles, in the last chart picture below, in a way appropriate to the relative size and importance of the yellow-outlined "maybe" - type rl pattern (that is, the rl pattern that is the second from the left on the hand-drawn list of the rl patterns).

These two potential modifications of rl patterns are now noted in post#1 of this thread.

-----

I practice-traded this same chart area again, this time finding that the very meaning of the rl pattern played into how the chart moves.
In the first chart below, two rather subtle rl patterns are the opposite of each other and, together, form a good straight line. But what I didn't realize in my failed trade, was that the yellow-line rl pattern in the fifth chart picture was, in meaning, suggesting that the straight line later drawn merely changed the significance of that yellow-line rl pattern into a large "maybe" multi-directional chart area being set. That being declared, the straight line became price support and price jumped off it fast:

In this example, I found trouble trying to apply ordinary-sized rl patterns. So, what I did was make a simple pattern really big, then make an rl pattern of it, and finally read the direction implied in the parts of this rl pattern. This is shown in the first chart picture below:

In the second and third chart pictures -- because I made the chart's candles smaller, I needed only two chart pictures -- below, I found this rl pattern repeated, but in a modest way while although repeating. So, I ignored the small stuff again, here, and instead put in a large simple pattern that also, as the lower half of it implied was the rl pattern opposite to the first big rl pattern. Then I traded into the upper half of that large simple pattern, with success.



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

I'm hoping that with this post, I can move beyond the set of descriptive points in the overall method for trading rl patterns,
and simply continue to present examples as I practice-trade over time.
Then, it'll be easier to rewrite post#1 in a way that both adds no descriptive points and makes it abundantly clear and useful in how I describe the method.



I did ad one thing, that of a way to use the building pattern called (empty space), that is, the "( )" in the hand-drawn picture.
An example of it is below; it has comparing the second formation below, which is a first rl pattern, with the first formation, which is so similar to the second formation that I went ahead and compared them, because the circle and the second-formation rl pattern are opposites. Now that I think about it, it would have made sense if I had extended the straight line connnected to the fake first formation, and traded with it. However, I didn't, and instead went with the rebound trade, that single candle being so severe and the (undrawn (and unconscious, since I just (consciously) thought of it) first-rl pattern it could be considered a part of, made for a good trade. :




I then traded the extended line suggested, just to find out what'd happen but not next taking it literally only direction-suggestedly, feeling somewhat secure about it, since the charts shown above had both a rolling and a clear level-break in the intention of their rl patterns. Too, though, there was a huge possible range in this rolling. When I traded down, I chose a higher spot on the chart to do so; even so, I did suffer a significant drawdown, before the trade went through, if by then on exit not-automatically but by how the newer part of chart read.

Such flexibility in how to use the method is described enough, I now figure, in the first post, to allow me(,) to trade with the current post#1, as suggested above in the text before the last set of chart pictures.



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


I then traded on the new information the extensive extra chart provided, and again watching out for contrary chart along the way while keeping my finger on the exit button once again (since, this time, I expected a larger jump upward),
confirming that the post#1 description is, while somewhat unreadable, is complete.



-- The site-owners now allow more than seven (7) pictures to be posted, now: That's cool.

Hi! Again.

Here is just a thought: What if you are overcomplicating things? Aristotle sort of undercomplicates things. But maybe somewhere in between? Sort of like: Buy when its going up and sell when its going down.

If its going up and it stops, close it and vice versa. Maybe dont put all yours eggs in one basket, but just sort of... really tiny lots?

Hey yaed, thanks for returning!

I took what you said seriously -- whether or not it'll actually work -- and, instead of picking out any particular shape, I thought up a way to depend on the consistency of whatever shapes are there at the time. So, let'd say that

1. within a certain area, the ups and downs seem rather random.
2. In another, the small shapes are equal, to some degree.
3. In a third area, the candles simply make a straight line.
4. In a fourth area -- which I demonstrate below -- most of the area fits in a well-defined area, and a very small part of the area stands distinctly separate from the well-defined area.
5. In a fifth area, two areas opposite each other by balancing off each other.

So I draw already-build in shapes -- filled shapes, lines, a kind of dot, and perhaps compound shapes (Gann fans, etc.) -- between/from these areas to figure really good lines to trade off. Also, eventually, one can improve on these five area descriptions with the built-in shapes.


At least, that's the new method (for forex; I stick with the older method more, if I ever return to stocks.)

This new method does feel easier, as I can pick up on both small unusually-telling patterns and large, otherwise-missable areas.

The example of the fourth area is below:

Of course I do have a set of patterns for the list, you know me; at the same time, I just keep them around to quickly remind me of each rather-long explanation in the list. I guess I'll provide it sometime, though no reason to confuse others further; more examples make sense though. (As always, it's still practice trading.)












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

Never mind this, I just like to keep a record of my old method:




"
Here is the roller-language (rl) patterns and, to the right of the tall vertical line shown, the building patterns:


1)
Another way to think of the rl patterns, left to right, is as a :

1. outer-spike (with triangle to set new level)
2. triangle/square
3. square
4. spike then/as-part-of a curve
5. curve

One can interprete a simple part of an rl pattern as having a little of a directional flavor to it, that is in this case, upward.
As well, one can change the space between and size of all candles, in a way appropriate to the relative size and importance of the rl pattern concerned.

2)
The intention, in order from left to right of the rl patterns:

1. make a new level by establishing it with the triangle atop the dramatic vertical jump to it
2. try to make a new level, its try somewhat failing and instead going some toward being a square
3. stabilize level around being a square
4. a-bit try to go for a level with a spike, then simply returning to an ongoing continuance of consecutive and opposed curves
5. a curve, that is one of a continuing flow of curves (that looks like a wave, say) going the same way it's been

These descriptions of intent for each rl pattern may be way off what is actually happening,
but may, as the description for each rl pattern, contribute to when to include that rl pattern on one's trading chart.
Also:
Because one of the first and fifth, and also second and fourth, resembles the other in this pairing through how much it commits to showing how much, for itself, the higher or lower level of price is at that set of candles (note: originally, I used those haikon (spelling?) - type candles to make the method, but found, while at this site, that regular candles work as well) within the rl pattern concerned. Thus, I will often try and find the other side of that pairing, as if to then find how the chart rolls; or at least, if I find one, then if the other appears, I can consider, often, that both together cancel each other out, because of their equivalent nature.
As well:
The rl patterns work in size and direction.
Finally (described here through an example in post#966):
I practice-traded this same chart area again, this time finding that the very meaning of the rl pattern played into how the chart moves.
In the first chart below, two rather subtle rl patterns -- 2nd and 5th rl patterns -- are the opposite of each other and, together, form a good straight line. But what I didn't realize in my failed trade, was that the yellow-line rl pattern -- a rather large and significant 2nd rl pattern -- in the fifth chart picture was, in meaning, suggesting that the straight line later drawn appropriately through the noted 2nd and 5th rl patterns merely changed the significance of that yellow-line rl pattern into a large "maybe" multi-directional chart area being set. That being declared, the straight line became price support and price jumped off it fast:

3)
as a way to feel more confident in simplifying rl into these simple shapes (since it is humans that choose how the trading chart is made):

1. triangle (first two rl patterns)
2. square (middle rl pattern)
3. circle (the two rl patterns on the other side of the middle rl pattern)

to, at times, abbreviate a fair number of rl patterns (without dipping into what patterns modified them):

Then, one can build one of the rl patterns by adding the simple shape to a building shape,
in a way that gets that rl pattern's intent on existence:
the building shapes -- those to the right of the tall vertical line in the hand-drawn picture several posts ago --
are

1. [both straight lines and curves are assumed to exist, and thus not shown in the picture]
2. period
3. empty space

Finally, of course there's always that (empty space) in the method that I miss and so lose, and thus must miss some trades due to the admitted lack of that part of the chart in order to make a clear trade. Building with that building pattern would often serve an excellent trading decision. As well, there's that obviously-correct interpretation of the chart that comes to no conclusion, except unless what is not charted right there -- again, the (empty space) -- would show direction.


In conclusion, one can

1. a) leave the simple shapes as they are,
2. b) build an rl pattern
3. c) make a traditional big pattern --

1. triangle (Gann fan)
2. square (grid)
3. circle (some kind of echoing off one period)

​.


The rl-pattern chart pictures in posts #961-5 are still okay, if not the text around them (as the text was me working up the charting method shown above).
They give good examples of, for instance, how one can build an rl pattern or several of them to isolate where to put a traditional big pattern.

To include news in the rl charting method:

Note also that this method, in stock trading, takes on a whole new life (so to speak),
since a(t least a) small-company stock can create from its initial opening of its all-time chart, a set of rl patterns that set a story of how to interpret its chart. Then, as the chart goes along with the company's development and thus different news affect the company's stock's chart, one rl pattern or a different set or a completely-different set of rl patterns may develop from how the company apparently is fairing in the world.
Roller language translates more like the more-basic roller-language method shown above,
in the larger companies/corporations' stock charts, and in various basic-supply symbols such as forex;
however, if a market-wide happening occurs, such as a physical strike upon where those who trade the market depend heavily on or on a major change in the market overall,
then a whole group of stocks will take on the same rl pattern, because of this same news affecting them all.

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

-- For a metaphor to help one get into the three-simple-shapes portion of rl above, and, as well, my personal experience in the trading field,
see post #965.


----------

Finally, of course there's always that (empty space) in the method that I miss and so lose, and thus must miss some trades due to the admitted lack of that part of the chart in order to make a clear trade.
"

Okay, I cleaned up how the first post reads of the last post's new charting method (extracted, in a bit, from the method before it) -- "

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

This charting method, while being only used in practice (non-$) trading since that's all I do,
may help others through at least thinking about how it works, thus at least helping to improve their own charting methods.

The point of the method is to avoid over-patterning while still leveraging all the patterns on the chart.

The method is:

Within a certain area, one of the following -- eventually, one can improve on these five area descriptions with the built-in shapes --

1. the ups and downs seem rather random
2. the small shapes are equal, to some degree
3. the candles simply make a straight line
4. most of the area fits in a well-defined area, and a very small part of the area stands distinctly separate from the well-defined area
5. two areas opposite each other by balancing off each other

So I draw already-build in shapes -- filled shapes, lines, a kind of dot, and perhaps compound shapes (Gann fans, etc.) -- between/from these areas to figure really good lines to trade off. Overall, with this method, I can pick up on both small unusually-telling patterns and large, otherwise-missable areas.
This method is very heavy on emphasizing how much of the chart it can quickly cover,
so one must not forget to look at both the smaller and bigger pictures when considering any trader; thus, going back over the same past is really important.

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

"



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

Okay, some examples, then:

In this example, I did well on the close-up stuff, but forgot to do the bigger picture, thus damaging the (practice) trade (not shown) to the ultimate cost:

-- The types of shapes are numbered according to the method's areas' order.

In this example, I did remember, after drawing up most of the average picture, to draw up the bigger picture.
However, I didn't check the especially-small -- that is, any rare area I might've missed and/or stand-out area I can trade with, within the area I'm to trade in -- to, overall, understand to a reasonable degree what's going on with the chart to-be.

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

Method, from post:

"
This charting method, while being only used in practice (non-$) trading since that's all I do,
may help others through at least thinking about how it works, thus at least helping to improve their own charting methods.

The point of the method is to avoid over-patterning while still leveraging all the patterns on the chart.

The method is:

1) Draw these up in a regular-sized-candles area:
Within a certain area, one of the following -- eventually, one can improve on these five area descriptions with the built-in shapes --

1. the ups and downs seem rather random
2. the small shapes are equal, to some degree
3. the candles simply make a straight line
4. most of the area fits in a well-defined area, and a very small part of the area stands distinctly separate from the well-defined area
5. two areas opposite each other by balancing off each other

So I draw already-build in shapes -- filled shapes, lines, a kind of dot, and perhaps compound shapes (Gann fans, etc.) -- between/from these areas to figure really good lines to trade off. Overall, with this method, I can pick up on both small unusually-telling patterns and large, otherwise-missable areas.

2) This method is very heavy on emphasizing how much of the chart it can quickly cover,
so one must not forget to look at both the smaller and bigger pictures when considering any trader; thus, going back over the same past is really important.
3) However, I didn't check the especially-small -- that is, any rare area I might've missed and/or stand-out area I can trade with, within the area I'm to trade in -- to, overall, understand to a reasonable degree what's going on with the chart to-be.


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

As for news, I still hold that one has to characterize how the chart reacts to it, and watch for repetitions of this pattern around it, at significant later dates. The rl method -- though my last rendition of its description -- does especially well at this. I guess one could somehow repeat the method above, though, especially when, in a group of chart symbols, the same pattern repeats.
"


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

Finally, I think I got a grip on how this method is supposed to work, at least to the degree of me actually making a trade work okay:




I admit I didn't this example find anything I really missed, because I went over the same material fairly well the first time, and just then went from the average-sized candles to the larger-sized once I had made it through what available chart I had before making a trade.
Because of this confidence in how I went through the chart, I didn't break down and double-check for any small pattern I may've missed. Perhaps this is why my trade wasn't that successful as I might have gotten. Still, the trade went okay.


-----

I made another trade on this chart. The price was in the range of the first shape (a 4--b - type one) I had drawn, and there was another shape just like it that I made a parallel horizontal line off, a bit further on. So, I decided to trade between them -- all the while I blythely ignored the impact that the big fan that just happened. So I did have some draw-down from the latter, but the former two horizontal lines -- their origin being the start and first stop along a very big upward move -- eventually worked for the trade:

Hi ha-pattern,
for a while we had some conversation here regarding the Logarithmic-scale in MT4.
You are using Trendlines also.
What I have found out is that the Trendlines (and all the other stuff like ellipses and so on ) will more accurate with a fixed Scale in the Chart but the Trader have to change the Scale every time when there are new Highs or Lows.
Could you write an Indicator/Script that if a fixed Scale is used the Indicator/Script will change automatically the fixed Scale?
Maybe the Indicator/Script can check all open Charts after a specified Time X (customized by the Trader himself)?
Would be awesome and improve the work with visual objects in the Chart dramatically.
Thanks for any info.
Regards Zack

Thank you for visiting, Zackery.

While I do enjoy the sense of how programmers may think in some way (that is, some sort of logic and binary ( up and down that chart, say ),
I don't know programming,
and my only experience with it is decades old, in languages now gone.
I mean, I did look at MT4's indicator language, sure, but didn't take it far;
and that I don't even know anything about the from-what-I-read popular language -- C++, from what I recall -- that MT5 uses.

I do appreciate, as well, that you sloughed through at least my last post, and got, apparently, a fairly accurate idea of what it's about. You open up this method, as well, since the method (and thus I) indeed may be better served using even higher chart scales.

okay thanks ...keep up the good work you have done all the time...
Regards Zack

Thanks, Zack!


-----

I like this method, because it has a feature I never would have thought of --
It expands/exercises one's perspective, because one has to stay on one's toes to get anything reasonable out of it,
at the same time the description of it stays remarkably simple.

Here's a further example, achieved after several failures in a row at using the method.
This method shows entire areas both being copied several times and changing not the method description, but what it means to use the method.
What was incredible to me, was that by simply using this method, I found first one area copied in an unusual way,
and then another area, later on, also copied both in that unusual way and to a completely different internal way of its candles:

In this example, two triple-peaks -- in method, as-described on the chart -- were so encapturing of the overall chart, and price was at a good low place to make a long for the upper line of the fibo fan, that I went for the trade. It turned out that my exit price was, in time, way above that line, but the proportion held and I got the trade.


Another key thing -- one I did not write on the chart -- was that in the first chart above, price was rolling; since a circle has infinite radiuses, and price had already broken the downward fall in that chart picture, I figured that, at least eventually, price would return to my exit price.

----

This next example/practice, I show because I went into detail AFTER mashing the candles together as far as it let me and put in most of the observations, to put in the detail of the 4b (the 'small shape' of that-type method pattern ('pattern' not being a chart pattern, so much as the general construct of a chart pattern)) and find out what I could find. What I found, was a solid straight line, and so I traded this line alongside the fib fan.
MT4 skipped a bunch of time on the chart, so my trade, while apparently successful, did not show; also, I didn't show the chart pictures leading up to this technological event, but they did lead straight up the solid straight line.

I named, after two other ways -- number, as shown in the chart pictures above; then, some word-based one I now forget -- I tried, to a purposeful need for each type of whatever-pattern-it-is organization in the charting method I use, as now reflected in post#1.
-----
With this, I was able to work through the chart even with improved use of curves (as represented through the circle pattern in MT4) and the smaller fan -- fib fan, as described in detail last post --, as,
while highlighted is fine with big chart-area-enclosing shapes, I was apparently missing how the chart flowed in whatever smaller-spaced patterns the chart area presented. With smaller curves and smaller and extended triangles, the chart drummed up to something respectable.

Even though the chart looked respectable, I still got hugely surprised when I opened up a trade in the weekend gap. Yes, I know how it usually plays -- beware the gap and play the retrace, traditional wisdom usually says.

Anyway, I also fooled myself, due to fiddling with the between-candles distance with the new position of the lines I had installed before the gap.

So an extreme amount of luck entering the trade and a somewhat reasonable exit, even if the exit was based on chart picture 7 below and not on chart picture 6, had me doing a rather bad trade. Well, hey, at least it got through, and unconsciously, perhaps I knew I could.



After entering all this, chart picture #1 shows an anchor, and the horizontal line within it intercepts it/them, so I adapted the literal explanation of that pattern organization to fit the circumstances of a whole bunch of chart after this "anchor" area providing a sizeable vector right through the "anchor" area -- once I tested a retracing backward use of a built-in MT4 pattern device (a necessary thing, often, in this method.)


{NOTE: I underlined the key points that can contribute to use of the post#1 method.}


----
Here's a couple other points on trading I missed -- Make that space between where you want to exit and where the chart drawn point to exit at is, to account for what the broker wants from the trade. Also: Forget your own error, that's what the stop is for -- that is, unless the chart figuring you figure was too loose to just let it fly.

Charts for the first point right above:

This is a copy of the first post,
because I made several changes:




"
This charting method, while being only used in practice (non-$) trading since that's all I do,
may help others through at least thinking about how it works, thus at least helping to improve their own charting methods.

The point of the method is to avoid over-patterning while still leveraging all the patterns on the chart.

The method is:

1) I'm making it a given that a vector is the dependent-variable function of its angle as its independent variable and a grid(,net,etc.) as its second one, thus defining the limit of both how it modifies and how it builds.
Draw these up in a regular-sized-candles area:
Within a certain area, one of the following -- eventually, one can improve on these five area descriptions with the built-in shapes --

1. range -- the ups and downs seem rather random
2. equal -- the small shapes are equal, to some degree
3. vector -- the candles simply make a straight line
4. anchor -- most of the area fits in a well-defined area, and a very small part of the area stands distinctly separate from the well-defined area
5. balance -- two areas opposite each other by balancing off each other

So I draw already-build in shapes -- filled shapes, lines, a kind of dot, and perhaps compound shapes (Gann fans, etc.) -- between/from these areas to figure really good lines to trade off. Overall, with this method, I can pick up on both small unusually-telling patterns and large, otherwise-missable areas.

2) This method is very heavy on emphasizing how much of the chart it can quickly cover,
so one must not forget to look at both the smaller and bigger pictures when considering any trader; thus, going back over the same past is really important.
3) However, I didn't check the especially-small -- that is, any rare area I might've missed and/or stand-out area I can trade with, within the area I'm to trade in -- to, overall, understand to a reasonable degree what's going on with the chart to-be.


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

As for news, I still hold that one has to characterize how the chart reacts to it, and watch for repetitions of this pattern around it, at significant later dates. The rl method -- though my last rendition of its description -- does especially well at this. I guess one could somehow repeat the method above, though, especially when, in a group of chart symbols, the same pattern repeats.

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

-->Additional points about using this method -- ones that may be used or ignored, as you see fit
(just focus on the five organization patterns and however you draw around them,
if you want to quickly take something from the method
and its extra optional points below (with the news point above))
is below:

 

1. how the chart flowed in whatever smaller-spaced patterns the chart area presented. With smaller curves and smaller and extended triangles
2. a trade in the weekend gap. Yes, I know how it usually plays -- beware the gap and play the retrace, traditional wisdom usually says.
3. fiddling with the between-candles distance with the new position of the lines I had installed before the gap.
4. adapted the literal explanation of that pattern organization to fit the circumstances of a whole bunch of chart after this "anchor" area providing a sizeable vector right through the "anchor" area
5. once I tested a retracing backward use of a built-in MT4 pattern device (a necessary thing, often, in this method.

​I also add some points about trading in general, that most traders likely inherently know -- So, no offence, it may be more just a reminder for me, since all this is simply (,as it has been and will (likely) be,) practice and thus there is no constant (even obsessive) reminder when it's real (, as I recall) :

1. Make that space between where you want to exit and where the chart drawn point to exit at is, to account for what the broker wants from the trade.
2. Also: Forget your own error, that's what the stop is for
3. that is, unless the chart figuring you figure was too loose to just let it fly.

​
"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The site went down (for maintenance), and during that time I rewrote a bunch of the method,
so here's another version of it, as posted in post#1 also:



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

PERSPECTIVE

This charting method, while being only used in practice (non-$) trading since that's all I do,
may help others through at least thinking about how it works, thus at least helping to improve their own charting methods.

The idea of the method is to avoid
an overly-simple use of a set pattern that is resembled on the chart
and not
an organization-only description of whatever patterns are there.


The method is:

shapes:
position -- dot (w/persp.,"of") -- cause and effect -- line (w/persp., "+-") -- responsibility -- object (w/persp., how a vector runs thru a bunch of dots inside an object(/area))
A dot has a position.
A dot, being at every point along it, is thus and as well the cause and effect of a line.
Any object that places that line in some perspective and thus allows other objects to take action on that line, takes responsibility for that line; too, any part of that object shares the responsibility.

those shapes' dimensions:
A dot has 0D (D for dimension).
A line has 1D if parallel with an axis and 2+D if not; thus, a line is axis-dependent due to what angle(s) the line has.
An object has 2+D.

organizing-patterns' terms:
Looking up carat( ^ ): What I mean is a caret (or carot or several other words describing a ^ ) that is on its side twice, first as a lesser-than and then as a greater-than, thus creating a range of positions with a lesser or greater value of a particular topic.
The equal is simply = , or rather | | to include a bit of y axis on an extensive part of the x axis.
Vector, in Latin or rather, it said, New Latin (and thus which I looked it up on the Internet, because Im kinda reinventing the wheel on this one, and so looked for support in my conclusion of equations etc.), is carrier, I suppose thus carrying ones energy (along each new position of a topic) from one place to another.
An anchor is a dot of a position that relates an object to a line.
I do use a tilde to represent balance, I may add; this shows that the two areas are opposite each other both on the x and y axis within each, even while being together on one axis.

On a time-based chart, that is, a pair of x and y axes, with time on one axis, the terms above need their
organizing-patterns' on-chart subdefinitions:
range -- on the ups and downs seem rather random
equal -- the small shapes are equal, to some degree
vector -- the candles simply make a straight line
anchor -- most of the area fits in a well-defined area, and a very small part of the area stands distinctly separate from the well-defined area
balance -- two areas opposite each other by balancing off each other, thus achieving this type of symmetry


As for news :
I still hold that one has to characterize how the chart reacts to it, and watch for repetitions of this pattern around it, at significant later dates. The rl method -- though my last rendition of its description -- does especially well at this, because set patterns dont need organizing patterns around them, as news acts in that role. .

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

-->Additional points about using this method -- ones that may be used or ignored, as you see fit
(just focus on the five organization patterns and however you draw around them,
if you want to quickly take something from the method
and its extra optional points below (with the news point above))
is below:

1. how the chart flowed in whatever smaller-spaced patterns the chart area presented. With smaller curves and smaller and extended triangles
2. a trade in the weekend gap. Yes, I know how it usually plays -- beware the gap and play the retrace, traditional wisdom usually says.
3. fiddling with the between-candles distance with the new position of the lines I had installed before the gap.
4. adapted the literal explanation of that pattern organization to fit the circumstances of a whole bunch of chart after this "anchor" area providing a sizeable vector right through the "anchor" area
5. once I tested a retracing backward use of a built-in MT4 pattern device (a necessary thing, often, in this method.
​I also add some points about trading in general, that most traders likely inherently know -- So, no offence, it may be more just a reminder for me, since all this is simply (,as it has been and will (likely) be,) practice and thus there is no constant (even obsessive) reminder when it's real (, as I recall) :
1. Make that space between where you want to exit and where the chart drawn point to exit at is, to account for what the broker wants from the trade.
2. Also: Forget your own error, that's what the stop is for
3. that is, unless the chart figuring you figure was too loose to just let it fly.
​
​
​

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

I am so grateful for having the last two visitors to this thread, as I got good upgrades off their ideas.
The last visitor offered the idea of increasing the charts' time period. I like having my charts at the one-minute scale, because it's the lowest denominator for figuring what's going on. However, I visited a third person's thread, the thread's topic including how to trade the consensus view of big-time traders -- i.e., the COD -- over the long-term chart view and, in this thread, average-style indicators for very longterm candles. For this, I could find and correlate with some of the biggest-affect patterns -- with fans, 'echoes', grids and the like, even; or, just a very long-term but only one-time touch on a single line -- and thus include this idea and its longterm consideration.
So I thought, hey, this makes sense. And then, I reasoned, there in a post, that the next point of logic would be, to me, that an average-length hold would include news that is or is not affecting lots of different countries and thus forex symbols. One could confirm this with an indicator (the last one I noticed being one the ff member called Hanover wrote and posted a while ago.) Perhaps I could include news only as one-minute points for the highest-grade news; it would be more difficult, however, to confirm multi-symbol pattern aligning at/around a particular news, so I'm unsure how to do this. I don't think putting little news points on the chart will help if I only (practice-) trade one symbol, because I'd then fail to get consensus among the different symbols. Oh wait, I have an idea: If the news changes how the longterm patterns are effective, could be a way around this, for applying points where important news is onto the chart.
Okay, so ....
well...I changed the "news" section of post #1 (as well as the title of the method, before this):

"
As for news :
I still hold that one has to characterize how the chart reacts to it, and watch for repetitions of this pattern around it, at significant later dates. The rl method -- though my last rendition of its description -- does especially well at this, because set patterns don't need organizing patterns around them, as news (and the original story opening that symbol, in some symbol-type instances) acts in that role.
Consensus among several symbols in a group, both around news in the average time period and among actual-trader consensus (source) and how it deviates among very simple averaging lines across the chart (usually changing consensus on the longer-term charts)
about how much that news affects them, as shown through each of these symbols using about the same chart pattern, is a way that is (,after figured from noted source,) both around and that complements the rl idea for in-company's-symbol's-chart patterns that repeat.
Finally, the extremely shortterm chart period is usually random, though often not around big news, I've found. Thus does this method address mere randomness, as described in this post, up to "news".
I'm not gonna try and figure what a piece of news itself means, in terms of changed numbers of finance news etc., as this is a specialty that is separate from plain charting.

"

A rewrite of this, one that spans out why and where roller language (rl) instead of / with the perspective method -- so, five things possible as tools -- news reading; perspective method to handle near-random patterns on the chart; multi-symbol consensus of news reaction on chart around that news' time posted; actual-trader consensus with simple averaging lines on the chart; and, any patterns that consistently show up on a chart for a particular symbol and/or a particular symbol's group of symbols.

"

As for news :
I still hold that one has to characterize how the chart reacts to it, and watch for repetitions of this pattern around it, at significant later dates. The rl method -- though my last rendition of its description -- does especially well at this, because set patterns don't need organizing patterns around them, as news (and the original story opening that symbol, in some symbol-type instances) acts in that role.

Consensus among actual-trader consensus (source) and how it deviates among very simple averaging lines across the chart, usually changing consensus on the longer-term charts.
Average-term, consensus is among several symbols in a group, around news in the average time period and about how much that news affects them, as shown through each of these symbols using about the same chart pattern, is a way that is (,after figured from noted source from a dedicated indicator. Maybe the news' consensus pattern between forex symbols does repeat at least for a while, it thus becoming an rl pattern.
Finally, the extremely shortterm chart period is usually random, though often not around big news, I've found. Thus does this method address mere randomness, as described in this post, up to "news".

I'm not gonna try and figure what a piece of news itself means, in terms of changed numbers of finance news etc., as this is a specialty that is separate from plain charting. Such can be a substitution for the chart itself, if one is good enough at it, and where one isn't, the chart pitches in.
The tools --
news reading;
perspective method to handle near-random patterns on the chart;
multi-symbol consensus of news reaction on chart around that news' time posted;
actual-trader consensus with simple averaging lines on the chart (source​);
and, any patterns that consistently show up on a chart for a particular symbol and/or a particular symbol's group of symbols.

"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Okay, I print post one again:




"


The tools --
news reading;
perspective method to handle near-random patterns on the chart;
multi-symbol consensus of news reaction on chart around that news' time posted;
actual-trader consensus with simple averaging lines on the chart;
and, any patterns that consistently show up on a chart for a particular symbol and/or a particular symbol's group of symbols.

Below is only to address randomness, which is as of now the only one I do -- and I only practice --, thus allowing trading at any time:

PERSPECTIVE Trading

This charting method, while being only used in practice (non-$) trading since that's all I do,
may help others through at least thinking about how it works, thus at least helping to improve their own charting methods.

The idea of the method is to avoid
an overly-simple use of a set pattern that is resembled on the chart
and not
an organization-only description of whatever patterns are there.


The method is:

shapes:
position -- dot (w/persp.,"of") -- cause and effect -- line (w/persp., "+-") -- responsibility -- object (w/persp., how a vector runs thru a bunch of dots inside an object(/area))
A dot has a position.
A dot, being at every point along it, is thus and as well the cause and effect of a line.
Any object that places that line in some perspective and thus allows other objects to take action on that line, takes responsibility for that line; too, any part of that object shares the responsibility.

those shapes' dimensions:
A dot has 0D (D for dimension).
A line has 1D if parallel with an axis and 2+D if not; thus, a line is axis-dependent due to what angle(s) the line has.
An object has 2+D.

organizing-patterns' terms:
Looking up carat( ^ ): What I mean is a caret (or carot or several other words describing a ^ ) that is on its side twice, first as a lesser-than and then as a greater-than, thus creating a range of positions with a lesser or greater value of a particular topic.
The equal is simply = , or rather | | to include a bit of y axis on an extensive part of the x axis.
Vector, in Latin or rather, it said, New Latin (and thus which I looked it up on the Internet, because Im kinda reinventing the wheel on this one, and so looked for support in my conclusion of equations etc.), is carrier, I suppose thus carrying ones energy (along each new position of a topic) from one place to another. It may also act as an axis or a line segment, the former providing high-low size-and-balance way to measure and the latter a termporary aligning that can be built upon.
An anchor is a dot of a position that relates an object to a line.
I do use a tilde to represent balance, I may add; this shows that the two areas are opposite each other both on the x and y axis within each, even while being together on one axis.

On a time-based chart, that is, a pair of x and y axes, with time on one axis, the terms above need their
organizing-patterns' on-chart subdefinitions:
range -- on the ups and downs seem rather random
equal -- the small shapes are equal, to some degree
vector -- the candles simply make a straight line
anchor -- most of the area fits in a well-defined area, and a very small part of the area stands distinctly separate from the well-defined area
balance -- two areas opposite each other by balancing off each other, thus achieving this type of symmetry


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

-->Additional points about using this method -- ones that may be used or ignored, as you see fit
(just focus on the five organization patterns and however you draw around them,
if you want to quickly take something from the method
and its extra optional points below (with the news point above))
is below:

1. how the chart flowed in whatever smaller-spaced patterns the chart area presented. With smaller curves and smaller and extended triangles
2. a trade in the weekend gap. Yes, I know how it usually plays -- beware the gap and play the retrace, traditional wisdom usually says.
3. fiddling with the between-candles distance with the new position of the lines I had installed before the gap.
4. adapted the literal explanation of that pattern organization to fit the circumstances of a whole bunch of chart after this "anchor" area providing a sizeable vector right through the "anchor" area
5. once I tested a retracing backward use of a built-in MT4 pattern device (a necessary thing, often, in this method.
​I also add some points about trading in general, that most traders likely inherently know -- So, no offence, it may be more just a reminder for me, since all this is simply (,as it has been and will (likely) be,) practice and thus there is no constant (even obsessive) reminder when it's real (, as I recall) :
1. Make that space between where you want to exit and where the chart drawn point to exit at is, to account for what the broker wants from the trade.
2. Also: Forget your own error, that's what the stop is for
3. that is, unless the chart figuring you figure was too loose to just let it fly.
​


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

As for news :
I don't cover it in this journal.

I still hold that one has to characterize how the chart reacts to it, and watch for repetitions of this pattern around it, at significant later dates. The rl method -- though my last rendition of its description -- does especially well at this, because set patterns don't need organizing patterns around them, as news (and the original story opening that symbol, in some symbol-type instances) acts in that role.

Consensus among actual-trader consensus (source) and how it deviates among very simple averaging lines across the chart, usually changing consensus on the longer-term charts.
Average-term, consensus is among several symbols in a group, around news in the average time period and about how much that news affects them, as shown through each of these symbols using about the same chart pattern, is a way that is (,after figured from noted source from a dedicated indicator. Maybe the news' consensus pattern between forex symbols does repeat at least for a while, it thus becoming an rl pattern.
Finally, the extremely shortterm chart period is usually random, though often not around big news, I've found. Thus does this method address mere randomness, as described in this post, up to "news".

I'm not gonna try and figure what a piece of news itself means, in terms of changed numbers of finance news etc., as this is a specialty that is separate from plain charting. Such can be a substitution for the chart itself, if one is good enough at it, and where one isn't, the chart pitches in.
I have, of course, studied it in depth, to get roller language from stocks and for figuring some forex from its news.
My practice, however, has been, besides rl, general reading of the chart -- with pre-set patterns I got elsewhere and made up myself. I found I was taking them too seriously, and the method this post describes gets me past this.



"



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