Ingot54 wrote:.....my broker can only offer me dummy volume figures, based on his own business volume.
I just hold the view that there is no real assessable volume available for Forex ...

Pedigree wrote:I am not hearing this for the first time, and I am aware that volume data varies from broker to broker as does price itself. What I am not certain of is that this is reason enough to ignore it.

And volume is a part and parcel of what CJ has taught in this thread. Even his very last chart here

http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3 ... 320#p71320

took volume into consideration.

Could it be that you have omitted to fully appreciate the offerings of the last few pages which, to my mind, have been well more than just about volume? They have included not just HOW and WHY the MMs do what they do but also WHEN you can expect them to do it. I think this knowledge can only help anyone whose focus is primarily on price action.

Ingot54 wrote:

Pedigree wrote:I am not hearing this for the first time, and I am aware that volume data varies from broker to broker as does price itself. What I am not certain of is that this is reason enough to ignore it.

And volume is a part and parcel of what CJ has taught in this thread. Even his very last chart here

http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3 ... 320#p71320

took volume into consideration.

Could it be that you have omitted to fully appreciate the offerings of the last few pages which, to my mind, have been well more than just about volume? They have included not just HOW and WHY the MMs do what they do but also WHEN you can expect them to do it. I think this knowledge can only help anyone whose focus is primarily on price action.

Quite possibly.

I encourage you to continue. This is the first time I have seen such a focus on (the study of) volume, and I look forward to learning something. Your hardworking contributions, and those of Banteka, have clearly been helpful to others Pedi ... and are in keeping with the spirit and intent of learning to track the fox and defeat it.

For the moment, I have to remain resolute in my own course - it is far too early for me to be adding another dimension to my trading.

While I personally, do not trust the rubbery volume figures put out by Empty4 brokers as dependable enough to base a decision upon, I appreciate that other traders do trust broker's volume - at least enough to put their money on it.

I can only read and learn ... but I am not yet ready for this leap of faith.

Ingot54 wrote:I suppose with Volume analysis being the current rage here, purists like me are being sidelined from this thread.

I encourage you all to go for it, but I can't get interested in it - I just see it as a distraction, because my broker can only offer me dummy volume figures, based on his own business volume.

I just hold the view that there is no real assessable volume available for Forex ... at least at the retail level where I operate, so I will leave you all to it.

I'm doing fine with the CJ strategy as taught, and to see charts filling up with all these indicators and analysis, makes me wonder what Naked Trading really is. I am certain you guys are deriving a benefit from using Volume, or else you wouldn't be using it. But I just can't warm to it, and I want to learn Naked Trading as it was presented in the first 374 pages of the thread.

Maybe when I reach the level of trading evolution you guys are at, I will feel the need to join in here, but today ... hmmm ...

Looking for CJ.JPG

I notice in the above group, we have the whole flock looking in one direction, except for 3 black sheep doing their own thing. Of course, they are facing the same way as the other animal in the picture

Moral: (only applies to black sheep like myself): Don't always follow the herd

mjws00 wrote:So far I've always understood CJ's use of volume. It is fairly traditional on the charts I have seen. By that, I mean analysis such as we've used trading stocks and futures forever. i.e volume dropping while price is rising means exhaustion, etc. Frankly if he is prepared to use it as additional valid information, I trust that judgement and its success enough to consider it.

Banteka is running with some ideas traderathome (TAH) has put forth on the sonic thread. His view of MM's is very similar to CJ's. But his (TAH) trading style is essentially reversion to mean. That is dozens of trades against the current price direction, with the hope that it will spring back above your average price. The "run for profits" idea and "position building" comes from there. TAH posts trades in real time, and has very legit wins, imho. But it is NOTHING like the precision and execution taught by CJ. You won't see that anywhere.

I think there were problems with the last volume discussion. Partially due to language and simplification. I also see significant challenges in strongly trending markets that persist. So the "trade counter" the big volume bars is problematic for me and where reversion to mean trading breaks. On the other hand a study of volume bars being at the tops or bottoms of multiple swings is interesting as a potential clue as to whether the fox is getting long or short.

There is potential for one more piece of the puzzle to hunt with. But, there is still some nuance and clarity missing. At least for me. I'm always willing to learn.

Banteka, feel free to correct me if my interpretation is off. I've read your posts and TAH's both there (FF) and here, and respect your feel for volume and price.

Mike

banteka wrote:Ivan, I respect your point of view, of course but wouldn't you use a knife if you were living NAKED in the forest?