[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[RT] RT] [realtraders] S&P and Nasdaq S/R for 1/07/2000



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links


>>Commentary on S&R from 1/6/99:
>>
>>The S&P opened at 1405.1.This appeared to be a strictly Level 1 trading 
>>day.I was unable to follow price action at all but in one case there would 
>>have been a possible sell at 1424.6 and exit at 1402.4 or a buy at that 
>>level and exit at 1404.
>
>>
>>The Nasdaq opened at 3490.You would have bought at S1 3448 and been 
>>stopped at S2 3384.
>
>E-minis would have worked best to limit risk.Trading both, one would have 
>been close to breakeven.

I would be intersted in results of anyone's longer term testing of what 
Clyde Lee posted re.S%R and pivots to compare to different methods of 
calculation.

>
>Usual comments are below.
>
>The S&P closed at 1413.5 vs. 3513 for the Nasdaq.Numbers for both
>appear acceptable given prior range.
>>
S&P
>>
Level 3 R=1428.9....S=1379.1.....Drop dead Sell and Buy points.
>>>>
Level 2 R=1417.6....S=1390.4.....Stop loss points or reversal if
strong break

Level 1 R=1410,8....S=1397.2.....Sell and Buy stop points
>>>>
I believe the ideal opening trading range to be 1397.2 to 1417.6
although.
>>>>
Nasdaq
>>>>
Level 3 R=3585............S=3039......Same descripton.
>>>>
Level 2 R=3461............S=3163......Ditto
>>>>
Level 1 R=3386............S=3238......Ditto
>>
>>I believe the ideal trading range for opening would be 3238 to
3386.All levels seem risky to me due to range.
>>>>
>>>>DESCRIPTION:Level 3 are points if reached have a high probabiltity
>>>>for profit if sold at R or Bought at S. Level 2 are stop loss points
>>>>if you enter at level 1.They are also breakout points if 
>>>>penetrated.Level
>>>>1
>>>>assuming we open in that range are buy and sell points.If out of the
>>>>range
>>>>no trade.
>>>>
>>>>John
>>
>>P.S.
>>
>>S&R Guidelines are not "Guru" predictions but rather guidelines to be used
>>to compare with your own method or use as an additional indicater.The use
>>of
>>the concept is more important than the numbers per se.Comments regarding
>>proprietary nature due to conflict of interest have previously been 
>>stated.
>>
>>So as not to clutter airways on this topic private comments are suggested 
>>if desired.


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com