Repetitive patterns and other patterns - page 7

 
gpwr:
You have built the channel in a subjective way (the breakpoint is not in the middle, the width is not equal to the previous one). And if that's the case, what kind of automation are we talking about?
 
GT788:
The channel you have drawn is somewhat subjective (the breakpoint is not in the middle, the width is not equal to the previous one). And in this case, what kind of automation are we talking about?

One breakout point is not enough to know where the channel will be. You can only guess and make a corresponding prediction about the next price level (1.300), which, by the way, came true (point 2 of the channel). Having points 1 and 2, you may predict the upper limit and direction of the channel. The lower limit of the channel is not always clear. So far, it is situated where I have placed it, and we will see. All this is very subjective, of course, based on the subject's experience and changes in the course of events.

Comparing the start of the current up-trend with the previous up-trend (circled by ovals in the drawing below), it is very likely that the lower limit can move down, as shown by the dotted lines.

 
A100:
1.2923 to buy - only experience - nothing personal.
Wrong a bit (1.2326), but all the same - you can't lose the skill!
 
The author has 1.2925 (approximately) indicated on the chart as a possible lower limit of the channel. So, so far it's not that bad. At least for manual trading, but the robot would have failed in such a situation.
 
HideYourRichess:
Well, a robot would have been a failure in such a situation.
That's what I'm talking about.
 

Something TraderMax doesn't want to fix the losses - an indirect sign that they will give even lower

16:42 Moscow time added - 1.2975 sold hard

 
papaklass:
Who?
This is an extramural discussion about the possibility/impossibility of automated trading
 

Congratulations to A100 for correctly predicting the lower level. The dotted line worked out with great accuracy and now the start of the current channel is indeed similar to the start of the previous rising channel (circled ovals). By the way, if I had stuck to my original theory about the constancy of the channel width, my dotted line would have been my first prediction. The correct approach would have been to wait for point 2, then drop down to the previous channel width and get the lower boundary. For clarity, I overlaid the measurement of the previous channel width on the current channel.


One more thing to note. Notice how price went down to the upper limit of the previous channel (the red line) and bounced back. This shows the importance of those borders, if they are drawn correctly of course.

 
gpwr:

Congratulations to A100.

Yeah, you got 1.300 pretty good too :)

You won't believe it, but I'm stupidly waiting for 1.2875 (i.e. a figure lower)

 
A100:

Yeah you got 1.300 pretty good too :)

You won't believe it, but I'm stupidly waiting for 1.2875.

We will see. We have a triangle on the daily chart and it is quite possible that price will reach its upper boundary for the 3rd time.