|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
RJ Ratchford wrote:
> > RJ Ratchford wrote:
> > > I'm not trying to dig this all up again, but I'm still finding it hard
> > > to see where you are really breaking new ground here.
> > >
> > > rick
Walt wrote:
> >
> > Rick,
> >
> >
> > So you can look at 16 "dead" points, or 2 "living" points.
> > Which seems easier to you? (See further explanation below as to what
> > I consider "dead" and "living" in the market.) :) .
> >
> > FibberGann gives you "dead" fixed ratio points.
> >
> >
> > Walt Downs
> > CIS Trading
Rick wrote:
>
> Absolutely not. Fibbiganni (name changed for use on my new upcoming
> manual. COPYRIGHT!!!) is the use of dead points. And, it isn't 16 dead
> points either. Where do you get that info from?
>
<snip>
> But to classify the complete Fibbiganni trading method to be the use of
> static prices is showing limited knowledge on the subject.
>
> Just because we can SEE the available current res/sup prices ahead of
> time does not mean we have to concentrate on them. As explained above,
> it is just the dynamic price before us due on the time day.
>
> Dynamic resistance and support prices are NOT dead. They are NOT fixed.
> They change with time. That is what my TTC Formation calculator does.
>
> cheers * 1.618 dynamically!
> :)
> rick
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Rick,
I don't think you give traders on this forum much credit for
intelligence. :)
I believe that I have adequately defined and described the differences
between the methodologies. Anyone making even a token attempt to
honestly evaluate the differences would have no problem.
You DO seem to be trying awfully hard to make your system look like
TREX. I think that's wise.
Is anyone else here having difficulties seeing the difference? If they
are, please speak up, and I will certainly make every attempt to
honestly answer your questions.
Rick,
You have something that works for you, and I am happy for you.
:)
Walt Downs
CIS Trading
|