Wave59 Technologies

Hi Guys,


A couple of things. First, I thought I would post an updated YM chart. I eliminated the inclination line for clarity but inclination is still present. Additionally because of volatility and the wide range we are dealing with I increased the scaling to 47/1.

On a different front I was wondering if anyone has been able to achieve positive results with the pattern? If you have it would be great to see your efforts. If you haven't post what you have done anyway and perhaps I can give you some pointers to help get you going in the right direction.

Best,
Joe

Hi Guys,

Lately I have been busy with things other then trading as things have gotten pretty crazy around here. So I'm trying to get some normalcy back in my life and thought I would pose a simple question to the board. Has anyone been able to do anything worthwhile with this pattern? If so please post some examples so we can discuss them.


Thanks,
Joe

Hi Joe,

This is not meant to be critical of your excellent work, but, at least for me your pattern aligns too much with statistical noise to provide reproducible models. There are just too many possibilities for price/time to interact with all the lines. What do you think?

Todd

Hi Todd,

First, don't ever worry about being critical of my work. Criticism helps one achieve a higher level of excellence. Besides, when it comes to work and money I leave my ego at the door.


Okay, so I hear what you are saying however I just want to be sure we are on the same page. When you say “price/time” are you speaking of price/time relationships such as eighth’s of a Gann Box or just the interaction of price and time at the various lines of the pattern? If it’s the former it’s not going to happen. This is what I was looking for originally. A non-linear relationship of space and time which price would comport. [For those who have not read the entire thread … this pattern is not a true depiction of space/time.] On the other hand if you are just talking about how price and time interacts with the many different lines of the pattern I would say it depends on your point of view.


Let me step back a bit from the actual mechanics of building the pattern to address instead how I use it. It has two components, one that deals with time (CIT’s) and one that deals with price (support and resistance levels). As a timing vehicle it is no better then mediocre. What little testing I have done shows the CIT success rate running around 50% … statistically insignificant and no better then flipping a coin. However I still make note of the signals to see how they are interacting with other areas of analysis. Naturally if there is confluence with a totally unrelated technique more weight is given to the signal. Another thing about the CIT’s (there are up to 7 to a pattern) is that one or two usually produce a significant move. This is merely anecdotal on my part and have no studies to back that statement up.


Now lets turn to price which is probably where you are encountering the “noise” problem. In my work I divide time into “Phases” which are essentially cycles. The phases are part of an overarching theory and technique of mine called “GNCM” or Gerbino Natural Cycle Method. It’s proprietary and something I won’t go into at all except to say that the charts I have been showing are that of a lower phase. I however use the information from this phase on phase that is lower still. This dilutes some of the issue with noise. Finally I do not use the pattern during the course of the first “ring” (blue wonky circle on chart) because of ineffectiveness.


Circling back to mechanics, it is absolutely essential that you find meaningful EIP’s (Energy Inflection Points) for you to create consistent workable models. We actually have a mutual friend from this board who is struggling mightily with this issue. I’m thinking about doing something on Skype with him to get him over the hump. Perhaps I’ll record it and share it with the group or perhaps you could even sit in. Will have to wait and see on that one though because of issues unrelated to work.


At the end of the day it could just be something that is incompatible with you. We are all unique and assimilate data differently. No right, no wrong, just different.

If you have any more comments, questions, or suggestion, just ask. Naturally that applies to all. Trust me, I enjoy the conversation.


All the best,
Joe

Hi Joe,

Right -- by "price/time" I mean the location in time and price. That appears on a chart as a single data point, but as we know that single data point is a multidimensional entity. It seems reasonable to refer to price/time since both of those variables can be modeled using similar interval-preserving transforms. The Gann box would be a specific instance of a more general phenomenon which includes the curvilinear. Really, all I'm saying probably amounts to personal attitude.I'd have a tough time knowing exactly what was communicated by your time series/pattern interaction. But it sounds like you understand that.

I was struck by the relatedness of your method to mine: instead of GNCM I use "fractal completion," and instead of EIPs I use "areas of maximum disequilibrium." How about that?

Todd

Hi Todd,

I'm tempted to use the tired old cliche about brilliant minds but won't. What I will say is the I like the descriptive of "maximum disequilibrium". I mean when you think about it really cuts to the heart of the matter doesn't it?

Anyhow I was going over some of your work last evening and hope I get a chance to see more of it going forward.

Enjoyed the conversation,
Joe

I call this the "Black Hole Vortex" or "Event Horizon".

Let's see how this works out?

Something a little different. Here we are using the declination of Venus to define our energy signature with GCSP.

Joe