|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Kevin,
Wow, I,m impressed, thank you for
sharing
Sure would like to know your gartley formula if you
decide to share it.
JdF
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Kevin
Bryant
To: <A
href="mailto:dlevels@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=dlevels@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>dlevels@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 1:05
AM
Subject: Re: [dlevels] DIGL
Hi Kevin,
Having broken the OP support at 36 1/2 the
Gartley based on the 618 retracement of the "ab" leg is no longer
valid.
As you suggest it could go to the 786ab
retracement, around 32, to form the alternative gartley numbers, it will be
interesting to follow the developments.
>>>>
I've attached a chart with the one I was talking about.
Yes, my "X" selection is an arbitrary process,
and being a new comer I find that I cannot give any definitive reasoning
behind the process, other than looking for significant reaction
points.
My major criteria is that if there is the
possibility of either a Gartley or Butterfly forming, I try not to enter a
trade until the completion of the pattern, even if the final "cd" leg looks
inviting.
>>>>>>
I don't follow you here at all. "D" is considered the point of
entry for the patterns.
As suggested in this case, I would wait
until the expected pattern completion at 67-68, and look for additional
indicators to re-inforce the entry decision.
>>>>>>
Yes, that would be another potential "D" area, possibly with an inviting
looking "cd" leg.
Unfortunately, I have not located any scanning
formula's for indicating potential gartley's.
I am sure they exist, as I believe Gartley
developed the basis for these patterns in the 1930's.
>>>>>>
Interestingly, Larry Pesavento quotes (in Larry's book) from Gartley's
book on the pattern, and what Gartley describes bears minimal resemblance to
what Larry and Scott Carney (a former student of Larry's) describe.
Gartley said nothing about Fibonacci ratios. The pattern he drew in his
book doesn't even have the same number of legs as Larry's "Gartley 222".
I've gravitated to the pattern as a natural extension of learning the
DiNapoli Fibonacci stuff. If I'm not mistaken, Larry is the one that
introduced Fibonacci to Joe.
The way that the Gartley is described in Larry's book caused me to
dismiss it as something that wasn't for me, but I ran across Scott Carney on
the Web and found a significantly different description in Scott's book.
The pattern shows up far more often than the B&B's and DRPO's (in my
experience). As I'm inclined to do my own studies, having enough data is
important. Also, if you're going to trade a pattern efficiently, you
have to have enough opportunities to place the trades in your time
frame.
I've come up with a tentative set of rules for trading a Gartley that
seems to be holding up. Time will tell. I'm still working on scan
formulas in both TC2000 and RavenQuote. Wish I had just a fraction of
Neal's computer skills. Even without the scans, though, the patterns
show up with great regularity, at least down to about the hourly time
frame.
A fellow in the British Isles, Mark Baker, is coming up with some pretty
cool scan results for Gartley patterns, but to date, they are only for daily
or higher time frames. He's offering the software in beta form on
Scott's web site.
Kevin
To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:dlevels-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
www.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
dlevels-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx
|