Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (121833)	8/5/2000 6:40:22 PM
From: Monty Lenard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573708

An exhaustion gap nor anyother gaps are necessary. Continuation gaps take much longer to fill but if you will read further you will find "Return tests to the Breakaway and Continuation gaps make excellent pullback short sales on this @Home selloff. These two types of gaps rarely fill on the FIRST try". tejek, you keep using the words "HAD", "HAS", etc. It does not HAVE TO but there is a better than 90+% chance that it will. A VERY HIGH PROBABILITY. Just like there is a very very very high probability that AMD will go to the 200 DSMA. It does not HAVE to but when one sells off this hard I am fully confident that it will. That particular MA will be a good place to make a long TRADE. Now back to continuation gaps. Look at FDX on 12/07/98. That is a continuation gap from 33 5/8 to 36. It was 2/28/00 when that gap was filled. Well over a year. I could find you many many others just like that. I have scans that I run so that I can maintain current lists of these unfilled gaps. The downgaps also fill just as the upgaps do. Do 100% of them fill .... no. How big does the gap have to be? No specific rule I know of off hand but a 1/2 gap on a 50 dollar stock I don't worry about. A $4 gap (10%) on a $40 stock I never forget. I did not forget the FDX gap and when FDX failed ran out of steam I was there. MSFT has some nice gaps to the upside to fill. Look at MSFT chart 4/12/2000. Then look at MSFT on 6/21/00 and 7/7/00. Why did it fail at the bottom of that window(downgap)? It is a technical thing. Nothing more. It has nothing to do with Funnymentals. On intraday charts you will see this much more often if you have availability to them. Watch a stock that gaps down fill the gap then retrace back to the BOTTOM of the gap and then sell back off. The same is true just in reverse for upgaps. The first time it hits the top of the upgap window it will generally not penetrate the window but will instead reverse off the top of the window back to the upside. Look at RMBS on 6/13/00...high of 62 3/8. Look at RMBS on 8/3/00. Low of 62 1/4. Why did RMBS reverse within 1/8 of the EXACT bottom of that window? Why did the top of the window hold RMBS on 7/27/00? Purely technical reasons. Nothing fundamental but it sure is an amazing coincedence wouldn't you think? Hope this helps. monty