As we have demonstrated over the past 1-2 days, the e-Mini S&P500 was capable to submit itself to predictive analyses and forecasting at a higher timeframe (H4) than the lower ones ( , M5, M15) - See recent analyses/forecasts on TradingView.com's e-Mini Room here: https://www.tradingview.com/chat/#Fu3tMk..., as well as recent forecast/analysis and technical commentaries in hits in higher timeframe and lower timeframe failures here: .
In this case, the qualitative target "TG-Hi" was issued out of a H4 timeframe predictive/forecasting model.
Diagrammed is a recent reactive rally reflecting two scenarios:
1 - A first one, in which a smaller degree 5-wave (i, ii, iii , iv, v in pink) plays out a potential reversal congruent with inherent symmetries, as in Wave-i and Wave-v carrying same impulse length.
2 - A second one, in which a higher degree 5-wave (1,2,3,4, 5 in black) carries price to a structural level as would the Wave Reduction rule expect, hence offering added hinging support for a termination geometry of the Diagonal Triangle kind.
All of this is for pure "Game Theory" type of play, but it is worth keeping the options in mind, in light of a predictive/forecasting model that has provided data far more reliable than the standard use of patterns and market geometries.
As indicated before, the smaller the timeframe, the lower the model's ability to predict/forecast the underlying market. For this reason, TG-Hi is overlaid here as a reminder of its existence at a timeframe level (H4) for which the model was calibrated, and the use of theoretical geometric strategy reflects an alternative approach by default.
As a matter of comparison, I decided to enter short at 1999.50 following a peaking advance at 2000.50 in late market. That level represented a Pattern completion linking immediately following a .
Remember that the directional bias here remains heavily on the account of the predictive/forecasting model, as well as a developing Pattern, as signaled and confirmed in the technical commentaries within the link provided.
Finally arriving at the end of the deploying pattern - Make or break?
$ESU2014: Reversing UP @ 1993.25, or breaking DOWN @ 1992.75?
via @tradingview.com | #SP500 $SPY $SPX $USD $EUR
Please pardon my inexperience and lack of knowledge, but can you please offer me some guidance as to how to go about learning these forecasting methods /geometries that you use? It is way over my head but I am fascinated and also dedicated to learning how the forces and geometries of markets work.
There is only one trader that I know that pretty much absorbs a lot of the occult and advanced knowledge. Her name is Constance ("Connie") Brown, and she is way out there. I started reading her books over and over and over, and everytime, my mind's eyes were literally reading new information, new words, new concepts, new worlds.
If there is a stepping stone onto which to start looking at patterns, structures and put the bits and parts together, I would certainly recommend two traders who are also members of TradingView. They are:
@Jason_Stapleton - Focused on counter-trend strategies. He used patterns among other things, and his systemeatic "IF/THEN" approach would represent a really good "Drill School" program for the burgeoning trader. He has live lessons, and online classes, plus recorded videos.
@Akil_Stokes - Athletic trader: Focused, disciplined and "Kaizen" driven methodology. He has evolved much like a steady-growth, durable oak Bonzai tree, trimming the bad habits off of traders, and letting the little leaves come out into branches. His proven record is for anyone to see, and it growths very much steadily - Again, a Bonzai tree.
Connie Brown is worth reading, simply too understand the abysmal gap that can exist between a professional trader and a Connie-type Trader.
If there are books you are considering, I can recommend quite a few, but I would start with live talks with Jason and Akil - Both are very approachable, and easily found in the member search feature of this site.
Hope this helps.
However, I have some reservation regarding states' abilities to acquire and destroy a perfectly fine currency. In international relations, having control of the currency, or being able to alter that of an enemy state is central to foreign affairs.
Currency control is not just a matter of prestige of one's own turf, but a matter of dominance and control over others'.
So, in the most immediate activities, there is plenty of opinion to be had. Heck, we could spend hours on days and talk about the pros and cons about this. But what I would pay particular attention to is the unspoken, unseen activities developing across all businesses, and across all markets:
Simply put: Every one is willing to incur major, expensive infrastructural hauling to make place for this currency in the commerce of things. This is no fad, and no inconsequential - Consequence being that states would possibly need (and have already) taken measures to define the currency so as to control its impact and reach.
Bitcoin is neither gold nor oil, but it's a new alternative to inter-market and inter-continental control and influence.