Identifying KEY EVENTS Within A Wyckoff Accumulation Schematic:
The cover chart is pasted again below for proper viewing of the chart. Trading View's platform scrunches up cover charts in publications all the time. Which results in me pasting them again in the comments section below.
The purpose of this publication is to assist with the identification of KEY events within a Wyckoff Accumulation Schematic. Those Key events being Preliminary Support and Sign of Strength.
Identify Preliminary Support is KEY because it will give us an idea of where the first Automatic Rally should come up to APPROXIMATELY. It's important to identify the placement of Preliminary Support because it will help us determine WHEN the best possible place to EXIT (short) may occur. Of course, the use of indicators as the Automatic Rally plays out is very helpful to determine when we may need to EXIT (short) for the down-move from the peak of the Automatic Rally.
Another reason WHY the identification of Preliminary Support is KEY is to AVOID potential future mistakes or mis-identification of events. For example: Look at how mis-identifying Preliminary Support not only could have lead to an early EXIT (short) on the upward move from the Second Test; but it also led to this individual totally skipping Phase B all together and labeling an event as a "Sign of Strength." i.imgur.com/uhJdsPS.png
That example I provided in an image above ultimately ended up misleading his followers into thinking a Spring has begun and they had skipped Phase B all together. The price ultimately ended up doing the exact opposite of what he anticipated and I'm sure some of his followers lost money if they acted upon his failed analysis. He's done this several times on Trading View and other social media platforms. I was trying to point out the error/mistake he's making on those other platforms and here on Trading View. However, he seems to only want to focus on what he calls an error of mine instead of acknowledging his own error/mistake that's misleading his PAID subscribers to his "Institute.
What "error" is it I'm making that he's referring to? He says there are not multiple Automatic Rallies in an Accumulation Schematic. However, I've pointed out to him that even Wyckoff himself did not label all events within Phase B of an Accumulation Schematic. In fact, for the most part, MOST professionals using Wyckoff Analysis don't bother to provide names for events that obviously occur within Phase B in Crypto Currencies. So, I took it upon myself to name those events.
I thought it only proper to name the PEAK of a rally to the upper boundary of a trading range in Phase B as an Automatic Rally. I also thought it only proper to name the bottom of the decent from that rally to the lower boundary of a trading range as a "TEST" of that lower boundary or TEST of demand. There can actually be MULTIPLE tests of the upper and lower boundary of the trading range in Phase B. Which is obvious in this chart of BTCUSD BitStamp from the period of 2014 to 2015. Does anyone see any harm in labeling the test of the upper boundary of a trading range in Phase B as an "Automatic Rally" that rallied upward from a TEST of the lower boundary of the trading range? I don't... YET, he wants to make a big deal about it.
So, I "humbly" ask for any professionals with Wyckoff Analysis to tell me what harm is there in labeling a test of the upper boundary of a trading range in Phase B as an Automatic Rally? Wyckoff has not said, "An Automatic Rally can only occur in Phase A." What gives someone else who owns a Wyckoff institute the authority to make such a flat statement? Not only that, he provides no explanation as to WHY an Automatic Rally can only occur in Phase A. Probably because there is no explanation.
I will follow up shortly with an explanation of another KEY event in a Wyckoff Accumulation Schematic. Which is the "Sign of Strength."
The purpose of this publication is to assist with the identification of KEY events within a Wyckoff Accumulation Schematic. Those Key events being Preliminary Support and Sign of Strength.
Identify Preliminary Support is KEY because it will give us an idea of where the first Automatic Rally should come up to APPROXIMATELY. It's important to identify the placement of Preliminary Support because it will help us determine WHEN the best possible place to EXIT (short) may occur. Of course, the use of indicators as the Automatic Rally plays out is very helpful to determine when we may need to EXIT (short) for the down-move from the peak of the Automatic Rally.
Another reason WHY the identification of Preliminary Support is KEY is to AVOID potential future mistakes or mis-identification of events. For example: Look at how mis-identifying Preliminary Support not only could have lead to an early EXIT (short) on the upward move from the Second Test; but it also led to this individual totally skipping Phase B all together and labeling an event as a "Sign of Strength." i.imgur.com/uhJdsPS.png
That example I provided in an image above ultimately ended up misleading his followers into thinking a Spring has begun and they had skipped Phase B all together. The price ultimately ended up doing the exact opposite of what he anticipated and I'm sure some of his followers lost money if they acted upon his failed analysis. He's done this several times on Trading View and other social media platforms. I was trying to point out the error/mistake he's making on those other platforms and here on Trading View. However, he seems to only want to focus on what he calls an error of mine instead of acknowledging his own error/mistake that's misleading his PAID subscribers to his "Institute.
What "error" is it I'm making that he's referring to? He says there are not multiple Automatic Rallies in an Accumulation Schematic. However, I've pointed out to him that even Wyckoff himself did not label all events within Phase B of an Accumulation Schematic. In fact, for the most part, MOST professionals using Wyckoff Analysis don't bother to provide names for events that obviously occur within Phase B in Crypto Currencies. So, I took it upon myself to name those events.
I thought it only proper to name the PEAK of a rally to the upper boundary of a trading range in Phase B as an Automatic Rally. I also thought it only proper to name the bottom of the decent from that rally to the lower boundary of a trading range as a "TEST" of that lower boundary or TEST of demand. There can actually be MULTIPLE tests of the upper and lower boundary of the trading range in Phase B. Which is obvious in this chart of BTCUSD BitStamp from the period of 2014 to 2015. Does anyone see any harm in labeling the test of the upper boundary of a trading range in Phase B as an "Automatic Rally" that rallied upward from a TEST of the lower boundary of the trading range? I don't... YET, he wants to make a big deal about it.
So, I "humbly" ask for any professionals with Wyckoff Analysis to tell me what harm is there in labeling a test of the upper boundary of a trading range in Phase B as an Automatic Rally? Wyckoff has not said, "An Automatic Rally can only occur in Phase A." What gives someone else who owns a Wyckoff institute the authority to make such a flat statement? Not only that, he provides no explanation as to WHY an Automatic Rally can only occur in Phase A. Probably because there is no explanation.
I will follow up shortly with an explanation of another KEY event in a Wyckoff Accumulation Schematic. Which is the "Sign of Strength."
Comment:
If you click "PLAY" on that publication above, you'll see what I mean.
Comment:
By the way, if I make mistakes, I not only ADMIT I made a mistake. I also provide an explanation that led to the mistake. WHY? To help those who follow me AVOID making similar mistakes.
Comment:
The source I'm using for the DESCRIPTION of "Preliminary Support" and "Sign of Strength" is located here: stockcharts.com...school/doku.php?id=chart_s...
Comment:
Description of "Sign of Strength" according to Stoch Charts website - "It's a price advance on increasing spread and relatively higher volume. Often a SOS takes place after a spring, validating the analyst’s interpretation of that prior action."
A "Sign of Strength" most often occurs in Phase D of a Wyckoff Accumulation. Schematic. However, there are times it can "BEGIN" in Phase C of a Wyckoff Accumulation Schematic.
A pre-emptive signal of a "Sign of Strength" usually BEGINS with a VIOLENT Up Thrust but not always. HOWEVER, it's NOT "CONFIRMED" as a "Sign of Strength" UNLESS it has burst through the upper boundary of the Trading Range marked by the Resistance Line at the TOP of a trading range.
A "Sign of Strength" is normally followed by a "Back-Up." which reverses back to the top of that trading range before a continued Mark-Up well above the Trading Range. This "Back-Up" is commonly referred to as a "Shake-out." A "Shake-out" often occurs at KEY levels of Support AND Resistance WHEN a decisive move is about to occur.
A "Sign of Strength" most often occurs in Phase D of a Wyckoff Accumulation. Schematic. However, there are times it can "BEGIN" in Phase C of a Wyckoff Accumulation Schematic.
A pre-emptive signal of a "Sign of Strength" usually BEGINS with a VIOLENT Up Thrust but not always. HOWEVER, it's NOT "CONFIRMED" as a "Sign of Strength" UNLESS it has burst through the upper boundary of the Trading Range marked by the Resistance Line at the TOP of a trading range.
A "Sign of Strength" is normally followed by a "Back-Up." which reverses back to the top of that trading range before a continued Mark-Up well above the Trading Range. This "Back-Up" is commonly referred to as a "Shake-out." A "Shake-out" often occurs at KEY levels of Support AND Resistance WHEN a decisive move is about to occur.
Comment:
Some may argue that a "Sign of Strength" can occur WITHIN the trading range defined by the Automatic Rally(s) at the upper boundary of the trading range and the TEST at the lower boundary of the trading range. However, I DIGRESS.
IF we see the price action beginning to move up violently from the lower boundary of a trading range and decide it's a "Sign of Strength," are we to conclude there will in fact be a breakout ABOVE the upper boundary of the trading range? What if we end up going to that upper boundary of the trading range, only to revert back down towards the lower boundary of the trading range? In that case, a "Sign of Strength" was NOT CONFIRMED. Therefore, I would have NEVER called it a "Sign of Strength" unless it was in fact CONFIRMED.
Sure, we are more than welcome to say, "This may be our Sign of Strength IF we see a violent move to the upside from the lower boundary of a trading range. However, it's NOT CONFIRMED AS ACTUAL "STRENGTH" UNLESS IT BURSTS SIGNIFICANTLY THROUGH THE UPPER BOUNDARY OF THE TRADING RANGE AND REMAINS ABOVE THAT UPPER BOUNDARY.
WHY am I emphasizing this? Because a "Sign of Strength" is FOLLOWED by a continued Mark Up (Upside move well above the upper boundary of the trading range) to new higher levels and potentially establish a new trading range.
IF we see the price action beginning to move up violently from the lower boundary of a trading range and decide it's a "Sign of Strength," are we to conclude there will in fact be a breakout ABOVE the upper boundary of the trading range? What if we end up going to that upper boundary of the trading range, only to revert back down towards the lower boundary of the trading range? In that case, a "Sign of Strength" was NOT CONFIRMED. Therefore, I would have NEVER called it a "Sign of Strength" unless it was in fact CONFIRMED.
Sure, we are more than welcome to say, "This may be our Sign of Strength IF we see a violent move to the upside from the lower boundary of a trading range. However, it's NOT CONFIRMED AS ACTUAL "STRENGTH" UNLESS IT BURSTS SIGNIFICANTLY THROUGH THE UPPER BOUNDARY OF THE TRADING RANGE AND REMAINS ABOVE THAT UPPER BOUNDARY.
WHY am I emphasizing this? Because a "Sign of Strength" is FOLLOWED by a continued Mark Up (Upside move well above the upper boundary of the trading range) to new higher levels and potentially establish a new trading range.
Comment:
I "was" preparing multiple charts to provide more details regarding how I personally try to determine as accurate as possible where preliminary support could be located. I've determined it would be better to explain this in a video that may take 20 to 30 minutes from multiple examples using Bitcoin.
Expect this to be done some time tomorrow. I need to get some work done in the mining room with additional duct work to get out the heat.
I have not created a video on Trading View yet. So, for practice, I will do a video on how to set alarms on your indicators. Most people set alarms for price rather than indicators. Those who have not set alarms for indicators will appreciate the video. This will also give me some practice creating a video on Trading View.
Once I create a video for setting alarms on indicators, I'll create a video on Preliminary Support.
Expect this to be done some time tomorrow. I need to get some work done in the mining room with additional duct work to get out the heat.
I have not created a video on Trading View yet. So, for practice, I will do a video on how to set alarms on your indicators. Most people set alarms for price rather than indicators. Those who have not set alarms for indicators will appreciate the video. This will also give me some practice creating a video on Trading View.
Once I create a video for setting alarms on indicators, I'll create a video on Preliminary Support.
Comment:
Good morning everyone. I want to make sure what I've described about PLACEMENT of Preliminary Support is CLEAR. When I said proper placement is KEY, I'm actually referring to THE PRICE LEVEL - "NOT" the location in regards to date and/or time.
So, some of you on Twitter TRYING to make a laughing stock of me from on this authors twitter account www.tradingview.com/...AT-Wyckoff-Analysis/ are simply misunderstanding what I'm referring to and simply making a laughing stock of yourselves.
So, some of you on Twitter TRYING to make a laughing stock of me from on this authors twitter account www.tradingview.com/...AT-Wyckoff-Analysis/ are simply misunderstanding what I'm referring to and simply making a laughing stock of yourselves.
Comment:
I think it's rather UNFORTUNATE Todd Butterfield and myself have ended up in a confrontational debate with sarcastic remarks. It's TOTALLY unnecessary and unprofitable to both parties and our followers.
I'm SURE there's PLENTY that can be learned from Todd in MANY aspects of trading. My main argument with him was the placement of the PRICE LEVEL of Preliminary Support, which can result in other mistakes. THAT's IT.
However, if he and/or his followers insist this nonsense on Twitter must go on, then so it.
I'm SURE there's PLENTY that can be learned from Todd in MANY aspects of trading. My main argument with him was the placement of the PRICE LEVEL of Preliminary Support, which can result in other mistakes. THAT's IT.
However, if he and/or his followers insist this nonsense on Twitter must go on, then so it.
www.tradingview.com/...AT-Wyckoff-Analysis/