Meyney wrote: Sun Apr 23, 2023 4:30 am MT4 does not have a standard MTF crosshair (why not?) like many other platforms....but there are a few you can use (made by other coders). I like as example this MTF screen with the crosshair at 5M and showing the orange vertical line at MTF's, perhaps it does ring a arrow/bell; 5m=magenta, 15m=gold, H1=aqua, H4=black etc. Not only the arrows (semafors) but also the path to the 'extreme/semafor'

There is all sorts of scope here for point matching, looks great (apart of course further proof fractality with the self-affinity on display). But this is the issue the creativity and the creative support does exist or can be brought to bear on the idea of manual or visual point matching. Really interesting stuff this. Thanks man for showing this here.

(-_-)

Why "trading systems" fail the consistency (in wins), test.

Orbit the Tool is NOT a “trading system” and most traders require a “trading system” to fit especially with their availability. It is this need for fit that appears to drive the perpetual search for “systems.” But truth be told this is an almost futile search as there is no way to conveniently split up the market flow structure to fit daily availability and still be consistently successful.
Here we remind that ONLY by trading the scaled Orbit Trade Cycle can consistency in winning be attained with any degree of certainty. We of course recognise in stating so that this is not necessarily convenient for everyone. However, it may be possible that understudy of how markets move at scale (intraday cycle or the 6n attractor), could lead to ideas for developing intraday and scalping schemes within the Orbit scale that are dependable (mirror trading 6n "saddle" values for instance). But the Orbit Trade Cycle is the only scaled trading we know that can generate consistent wins. In other words, using point matching to trade the 6n attractor. This of course requires dedicated time to read and point match the progression of the 6n attractor. Time which many if not most day traders with day jobs do not have. Hence the high incidence of forming all sorts of "rules" to define "systems" that would somehow tweak the market flow structure to yield some consistency that would suit traders (in the imagination of their creators). But that chops up a system (market), that is already fractured by its nature (else zigzags will not print to screen) --- which is hardly the way to go if winning consistency is the goal. You cannot force a change in flow structure, but you can learn to read the flow structure and follow it to succeed. The idea that it is just a question of using your imagination (and "knowledge") to apply "rules" to gain a great "trading system" is false when in fact the market is already a system (and one that very few actually know or in fact understand).

The Crow (-_-)

PS: So what is or are my point(s)? First if the market has a pattern (as we have painstakingly shown it does to this point), and if your "trading system" has no comprehension of this pattern (intuitively or explicitly), then clearly it cannot be dependable and is ultimately a gamble. On the other hand if you say (in spite of our advocation), that the market has no pattern and is strictly driven by random events such as news (as in fact most traders think), then it is impossible to develop any dependable "trading system" at all since there are no repetitive forms upon which you can depend or such forms as cue your "system" are too unstable to be dependable, then your "system" again must be a gamble. Think about it as there is truth here and you need to start taking a stand rather than put blame outside of your understanding.

Trading the Nested Attractor or the Orbit Trade Cycle

Below is what I mean here: viewtopic.php?p=1295510639#p1295510639 do look at the slides and try to make sense of them. Shortly I will explain each and we can discuss some of the implications arising. I will also explain in detail why indicators are a problem (huge problem indeed) and do not really help trading a chaotic system underpinned by a fractal structure and then give you a peak into the future about what will have to replace indicators - which apart from being slave devices - are just too slow to comprehend and track the translation speeds we experience in markets to allow the kind of winning rates that traders desire.

The Crow (-_-)

PS: The point here is that you can trade the attractors correctly (I do and so do my friends including the pilot), so it is not anything complex - you a) know the fractures and how they behave b) you match points or stops (using 5n/6n matching and any other extensions you find convenient), and using the structure in each of the given fractures defined for the different weights as shown here, you decide how to trade that piece of price action or c) you put your money down at inception and take it at top or bottom - all of that is possible with the prototype and right now. I of course do not trade intraday or scalp so cannot tell you how that can be done but saying if you understand the concept of the attractor and inverse on, etc you could may be fashion things to fit the behaviour here, e.g. the different fracture forms that present in sequence decide which to trade intraday or what suits your time). Notice also it is not about indicators - really, it is about your grasp of the thesis. But will now begin to discuss and explain the trading in detail in the forward periods. This is key since for a long time people have asked "how do you trade?" Well this is how and for good reason.

Trading Orbit the Tool

Tutorial: 001 How to Trade the Orbit Trade Cycle

We have spent enough time on the thesis (I think), now is the time to demonstrate it to yourself that it works and works so that anyone at all can trade it, trade it safely and start making money in a short space of time. It may shock and awe many the way it is traded and some may not believe this at first - but I assure you, sooner rather than later it will become clear that it is what I have boldly stated here that it is and it is so easy to trade you do not need more than the lesson below to begin. When I am satisfied that there is mass mastery AND mass interest I will open up. And this is NOTHING compared to what is to come. I clearly wish everyone trading well.

The Crow (-_-)

I saw this configuration of with an Aqua(3) low on H1. I also captured the Orbit screenface.

1. Is there a set of criteria that indicates that price has reached the H1 A(3) low strange attractor and that it is not just an intermediate point on the way to the actual strange attractor for A(3) low? That is, is there a set of criteria to check to determine if a point is locked in place such that it will not move from the place that it is presently located?

2. As it stands at the moment, I do not expect that this is the final A(3) low because I expect to see a low that is lower than the A(3) low in the bottom left corner, as explained below.

Not shown, but further to the left is a high M(5), which is therefore also a Y(2) high, an A(3) high, and G(4) high. So Counting that A(3) lowest low to the left as 1, then the turns are counted 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. But for numbering to get the A(3) 1-2-3 that will comprise the G(4), the counts 2 and 3 must be skipped over and the high on the right given number 2. So eventually, for the Gold(4) zigzag line to draw from that M(5) high, price must go below the A(3) low number 1 to A(3) low number 3.

regit wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:50 am I saw this configuration of with an Aqua(3) low on H1. I also captured the Orbit screenface.

Learn to trade and read the Orbit Trade Cycle and all that is cleared up.

(-_-)

Cycle Maps and Exception Handling

We all crave for perfect market situations which we know ahead of the market and can therefore manage always. Sometimes this is not possible and this regardless, of the utility and effectiveness of the tools we use to manage our trading. For Orbit traders electing to use the Cycle Maps as trading tools - we notify below how we handle exceptions within the maps and therefore what the trader should know and watch out for in the process of using the maps. Please carefully study, and keep in mind always.

(-_-)

[quote=regit post_id=1295510796 time=1682452209 user_id=4953812]
I saw this configuration of with an Aqua(3) low on H1. I also captured the Orbit screenface.

Regit as far as I can interprete my opinion; the MTF charts are screaming for longs; (all MTF arrows pointing up at the lows) About your Orbit screen: yes we are in persistent area down, so most arrows red, but KSO 6n is purple(!) and n-5n are 'awakening' 6n closed also and cyclicality n up. For me no shorts at this point

Meyney wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 3:07 am

Thanks for the input. I totally agree that the intra-day set up was indicating buying. However, the information that I posted about the H1 needing to make an even lower low to achieve an A(3) point 3 due to an M(5) high on both H1 and H4 was not intended to reflect the short-term direction for entering trades, but rather that a longer-term down move is in progress. And it will likely be several days or even weeks for the price at H4 M(5) high to make its way down to the corresponding M(5) low, because that M(5) is also approximately H8 or H16 G(4), H16 or H32 A(3), and H32 or H64 Y(2). (This probably corresponds to about a W1 timeframe.)

So, while price is cycling up-and-down on the partitions below Weekly, we know that it cannot exceed the high that is is seen at the H4 M(5) high. And also because of this H4 M(5) high, we can enter short positions anywhere between that high and the H4 low at Y(1) low point and eventually, price will go down to create an H4 Y(2) point 3 low below that Y(2) point 1 low. And for even longer term than this Yellow, H4 will have to produce an Aqua sequence inside of that G(4) down movement.

And when you examine H4 right now, you can see there is a Y(2) point 2 reached. But this point 2 has moved up twice now. This mobility of a point was my question about criteria that indicate it is finally fixed. It seems to me that it is mobile until the point 3 low is drawn.

It is possible that in spite of my best efforts, the diagrams I have shown here, i.e. the Orbit Trade Cycle mapping are still not understood for purpose and application. I now use words here in the hope that words may clarify my meaning more. What I showed in diagrams is simple and what the diagrams show is this:

Let 5n = b and Let 6n = a
1) If b = a and and b Semaphore > a Semaphore by +1 we have a match.
2) Exit current trade and enter new trade on any sign of choice (Fractal Pattern, Range Arrow, etc).
3) Set Stop Loss to Semaphore high or low, workout your TP.
4) All attractors to the left of a or 6n are complete on match.
5) Price will turn from low or high to the next match.
6) Risk of error 1/20 or 5/100.
7) Use Screenface to guide trades.

The suggestion is also simple use the mapping and the basis of the mapping (point matching), to trade Orbit the Tool, expected returns are high, no need to check this or check that you only compare 2 attractors 5n and 6n. Easy to use. But it is a choice to use the maps as you can trade Orbit the Tool as it suits you - without following my suggestions even just by reading the tool to guide your alternative decision on how to trade (may be using your personal "system"). My 2 cents

The Crow (-_-)