So it has no "entry trigger"? Then how is it determined it reads the market 100/100 correct?Darkdoji wrote: Mon Oct 02, 2023 12:45 am To those who complain about my communication or "teaching" style I say to you all the problem lies within a) You have not bothered to understand the concepts and have tried to trade Orbit as a "technical" tool looking for steps, patterns and key signals ----> It is Not designed that way and does not work like that. b) You need to understand first and foremost the precepts or concepts involved c) then follow the logic and hence all the books I spent hours of my time writing. If you do not see the massive difference between Orbit and the "technical" "systems" that exist it is probably because the differences are massive (conceptually), but have only subtle appearance in difference on comparative charts (that is looking at things superficially). This is because i) the fractal pattern is the same everywhere and regardless of approach it is the same fractal pattern everyone trades ii) the tools you see such as Zigzags and Semaphores appear familiar and therefore similar across different implementations but that is where it all stops THERE ARE NO DIRECT EQUIVALENTS AFTER THAT between Orbit the Tool AND THE "SYSTEMS" THAT EXIST NOW AS ORBIT IS NOT A "SYSTEM" BUT A MARKET MODEL. So it is in understanding the concepts and the logic that the learning of and difference between Orbit and the "systems" you trade lie. YOU CANNOT TRADE ORBIT AS A "TECHNICAL" TOOL AND MUST NOT TRY TO DO SO. First, understand the underpinning logic to understand its newness and efficacy as a chaotic model of the market and to understand that mathematically Orbit is what is is called an Oscillator Model of the Market. Orbit has not to do with signals but with how markets work. I have said you can trade your "systems" conjoint with Orbit but you cannot trade Orbit as you would your "system." They operate on completely different principles and knowing that is what what frees you to approach it differently. Please note that I respect the effort put into making "technical" "systems" and I do not say any "system" is bad or good as I am completely uninterested and have not spent a single minute of my life looking at any because of my knowledge of how markets work. I encourage (in the Orbit books), people trading profitable "systems" to keep away from Orbit as I personally do not see the point of leaving something that serves you well to exploit something new and that might be intellectually inaccessible. Orbit is not in competition with anything it is on its own and new in a class of its own because the principles in application are very different than all that exist. It is learning those principles that reveal the differences. There is a hell lot to know but I find we have not moved as fast as we would like because people still think of the tool in "technical" analysis terms ------> IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH "TECHNICAL" ANYTHING. Orbit carries a technical (mathematical) knowledge load from chaos theory and fractal geometry that is real and formally justified. "Technical" "systems" do not carry any knowledge load at all from anywhere. They are based on heuristics informally justified. I hope I am saying something that makes sense and help those trying to understand.
(-_-)
I have tried before to understand this system, saw the video, read the pdfs and all, the more i see it the more confused i get.
Didnt read all the thread as it is very extense so i dont know if more pdfs were available, but reading more comments doesnt seem to clarify anything to me.
Maybe i should wait for cloud version.
