|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
A couple of things attracted my attention to yields today. One is the
Martin Pring article on chart patterns in the October TASC on page 34. He
had an example of a generic H&S pattern with one left shoulder and two right
shoulders with the recent shoulder lower than the one between it and the
head. It looked similar to the current 30 year yield chart. Then in the
Yale Hirsch 2000 annual on page 84 his study of the 10 year yield shows
bonds being seasonally strong between August and December.
BobR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Ewers" <dbewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 5:02 AM
Subject: [RT] Re: US Bonds weekly
> Bob,
> I am unable to do that but Earl Adamy can.
>
> He sent me the attached chart a few days back, perhaps he can update it
for
> the group. It charts 30 yr. yields and shows an inverted pattern that I am
> looking at in the bonds, similar EW count (except up instead of down, a
PTI
> below 34 indicating a double top or failed fifth (again similar to the
bond
> chart I posted but up not down since it is on yields). I believe I can
make
> out the Head-and Shoulders pattern you are speaking of. If you look at the
> TL (trendlines) he drew (described on the chart), pretty interesting
chart.
>
> See if this helps and Earl if you have your ears on can you update it
(this
> chart was on 9-15-00)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "BobR" <bobrabcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 6:22 AM
> Subject: [RT] Re: US Bonds weekly
>
>
> > How about changing the topic from EW to where the H&S interest rate
> pattern
> > fails. At what interest rate level would you consider the H&S no longer
> an
> > H&S pattern but one of consolidation with higher yields in the future?
> > Likewise, if the H&S pattern remains valid, then what is the downsided
> > projection for yields.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > BobR
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don Ewers" <dbewers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 4:31 AM
> > Subject: [RT] Re: US Bonds weekly
> >
> >
> > > All, please understand, "we" are not arguing view points here (Scot,
> Steve
> > > and any others that have expressed "their" view points on bonds and I
> > > welcome that), "we" are just trying to figure out what the major trend
> is
> > in
> > > bonds is here, maybe a bigger picture is unfolding and "let us all"
get
> on
> > > the right side of it.
> > >
> > > I was offering up what one of the software packages I utilize was
> > > "potentially seeing". This is "not" a software admonishment, counts
can
> > > change and do sometimes more than I would like, but this is a
discussion
> > on
> > > direction . .. . not software, hopefully understood. I am interested
in
> > > other opinions particularly if they are backup by some substance. One
> > > interesting fact is when counts do change (for instance wave 5's
> changing
> > > to wave 3's), you are still on the right side of the market for the
next
> > > trade and with proper money management still make $$$.
> > >
> > > I see bonds hit 97-23 in the night session as I write this, lets
> continue
> > > the dialog.
> > > don ewers
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "t-bondtrader" <t-bondtrader@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 3:55 AM
> > > Subject: [RT] Re: US Bonds weekly
> > >
> > >
> > > > While all this may pan out, this is a very poor EW count. EW is
shaky
> > > > enough as it, but one must at least use this method correctly.
Your
> 2
> > > > lasts for five weeks and your 4 for 32, hardly the same magnitude.
> > > >
> > > > >From the above statement, Earl Adamy says:
> > > >
> > > > "...... The moderators seem to feel that free speech takes
precedence
> > over
> > > > civility."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Just what was uncivil about that statement? Surely, from Scot's
> > > analysis,
> > > > it was a matter of his opinion, which he is entitled to put to the
> list
> > > and
> > > > many on the list will no doubt benefit from what he has said. After
> > all,
> > > > while many do not think that EW has much predictive power, but is
good
> > at
> > > > seeing where the market has been and might go eventually, it does
> have
> > a
> > > > set of rules, doesn't it? EW does have major and minor counts,
> doesn't
> > > it?
> > > > Presumably one has to compare like with like. doesn't one?
> > > >
> > > > The comment was, as I see it, on the way the count was being made
> > against
> > > > the rules that most EW practitioners would expect the count to be
> made?
> > > > Yes? No? Scot was simply pointing out what he thought and as far
as
> I
> > > can
> > > > make out, did it in a very civil manner. What exactly is your
beef?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bill Eykyn
> > > > t-bondtrader@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
|