To: Patrick Slevin who wrote (5271 ) 1/22/2000 6:25:00 PM From: Jay Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9427
After reading Mr. Dorsey's response to you I have to reply once again because the entire concept is too loose as the rationale is that the charts are not Time constrained yet they are deliniated in Days. I don't really have a problem with this personally, as I can figure my own way out of this morass. But the DWA stance is that PnF is not Time-oriented yet the charts are based on Days. It's just not rational. I can live with this, I just wish DWA would get off the dime and admit that they view charts in Time. Obviously they do, else we would not be concerned about whether the stock reversed or did not during a session, a Time oriented Session. Ah, Patrick, I'll take a shot. Of course time is involved--but only with respect to when you chose to update your chart. When reading said chart, time is not a factor. Why? Because you have no idea when the last time your parameters changed enough to update the chart. It could be a day. Then again, there might not have been enough price action to allow for any change in the last week or month. Depending on what you wish to see, you can change the box size and update at a shorter time interval, but when you look at the chart, you will still not be able to say exactly when various price movements occurred. But you are already aware of this. Didn't you ask Atin if he could provide some time or date stamps for his program, so you could back test data? Mr. Dorsey's charts are not "based on days". They are only updated on a daily basis. If he chose a shorter interval, it might be useful for some, but for others it would add confusion on volatile issues. Whole columns of X's and O's could be added and not add much to the enlightenment of those with a longer time-frame for their investment. Does this help any, or am I just adding to your confusion? Regards, Jay