SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : The 56 Point TA; Charts With an Attitude -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Michael L. who wrote (10602)1/15/1998 1:52:00 PM
From: Dave H  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 79294
 
Hi Michael,

No, I'm not short GE (yet ;))
GE has two more days where the close most be greater or equal to the high 2 days prior before it completes the sell sequential I'm tracking. Before that happens, lots of stuff could happen, so I'd rather wait and see.

I have been using Parity to get exact measurements of technical indicators. I use TC2000 for charting. Parity is shareware and you should be able to find it on the net somewhere.

We jumped into RADAF because it is basically 2 ticks above the accelerated trend line (ACT), the trend line that has been guiding RADAF up for many many months now. After reacting to the impossible line (IL) [this is doug r's custom indicator], a stock will return to it's ACT. Since RADAF is right at the ACT, this is a low-risk buy as long as you stop out if RADAF falls below the ACT which would be a bad thing.
Right now we calculate the ACT as being at 12 13/16 today. Tomorrow it moves up. So...radaf better get its act together and start moving soon!

Oh, also, regarding waiting two ticks off the bottom on the signal day, that is only in regards to the PGDCEB.(post-dead-cat-exhaustion-bounce) which Doug R also invented. He has explained it here a few times on the thread, so you should be able to find it by doing some fulltext searches on PGDCEB.

regards,
dave



To: Michael L. who wrote (10602)1/15/1998 1:54:00 PM
From: Doug R  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 79294
 
Michael,

It's good to hear from you again. I'll step in here and poach a response from Dave if he doesn't mind >>gg<<. The RADAF strategy is not the PGDCEB strategy. RADAF violated the IL and now it's back to close proximity to the ACT (review the seminar material). The strategy involved is the IL/ACT dynamic. I hope that clears things up for you. I bet you didn't realize that you get online support after the seminar!

Doug R