|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
CBH is just to slow for anyone who does extensive intermarket work, which I
believe is essential. Not to mention the issues of scaling, running out of
room, making corrections, adding/removing chart notations, etc. all of which
are better performed electronically. That said, however, too many traders
lose the sense/feel of the price action by loading in all maner of formula
based indicators and looking at the indicators instead of the price/volume
action. One can readily use computer based charting systems and gain the
sense/feel of the market by using simple drawing tools (trend lines,
retracements, fibs, etc.) on a price/volume chart. I've found that my
trading has improved immensely as I've returned to relying on drawing tools
in lieu of formula-based indicators (e.g. ma's, oscillators, etc.). And
there's nothing better than looking at recent trading activity day by day
and asking what each day's price/volume reveals about buyers and sellers.
Earl
-----Original Message-----
From: BrentinUtahsDixie <brente@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, February 13, 1998 12:23 AM
Subject: Gen: Automatic Versus Hand Plotting
>RT's,
> I just read an interview of Linda Bradford Raschke in the new issue of
>Omega Research Magazine. She advocates "hand" charting and asserts that
>many old timers do this. I have really never done this aside from punching
>the O,H,L,C into my computer by hand. As she puts it [regarding charting by
>hand(CBH)] "Not only does it go to a different part of the brain, it sort
>of internalizes it, and you get into the habit of looking at trend lines ,
>of being aware of significant chart points." I'm thinking that she must do
>CBH "end of day," it would be impossible to stay up with intra day. Do you
>experienced types CBH? Any other comments about CBH?
|