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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bcrafty who wrote (70502)	4/4/2003 8:17:42 PM
From: ajtj99	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 209892

I disagree that the Brad is pointing down. Personally, I think the turn on the 2nd was a minus 1-day hit on the NDX lows on the 1st, which were a re-test of the March 31 lows. If that's the case, the next turn could be a high, which is what I'm kind of favoring based upon a plethora of stuff, but also including options expiration. I think we dump into it from above to kill the calls at QQQ 26 and above. By the way, a drop to NDX 1033 from a higher level by expiration would be about perfect for Max Pain as it's set up right now. It would also fill the gap if it's still there by then, and it would allow for a bounce up the couple days after expiration so the writers can unwind their hedges. Ideally, it would drop to NDX 1033 from a higher high than we had this week.

To: bcrafty who wrote (70502)	4/5/2003 8:07:47 AM
From: the-phoenix	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

bcrafty: I responded to your post, but my comment wasn't directed at you specifically. But there has been a ton of discussion of Bradley turns this past week or so (mostly on Velo's thread), and there seems to be a fair amount of cognitive dissonance, where folks will invoke the Bradley model to support a position and then say we are in the Big C and going to blast off next week. They might say that it is an inversion and April 11th will be a high. Why will this next upcoming turn be an inversion? I don't see any significant inversions in that chart. I see the Bradley Model and the Big C as in conflict. I just don't see how one can have it both ways. The discussions that try to reconcile the Bradley to the Big C (happening right here) are the ones that render the Bradley useless. "Oh, it can be +/- four days, or it can be an inversion, or even, it can simply mark continuations!" For me, the Bradley is useful, if I use it as literally as possible. That means, it signals a direction change on a specific date (OK, +/- one day, or two for weekends). As soon as the interpretation gets more wishy-washy than that, then it DOES become useless and I agree with those who so argue.