Price Patterns(Gartley,Butterfly,Bat,...) - page 23

[karmostaji]

so, what's the latest version of ZUP? I've got v69 still

I'd appreciate any help, thanks.

[Sergey Golubev]

Look at my previous post.

[karmostaji]

newdigital:
Look at my previous post.

Thanks

[karmostaji]

newdigital:
Look at my previous post.

One question (I hope you don't mind)

Is the default setting good to use? or do I have to change some? for example if I want the previous patterns to show as well?

Thanks

[Sergey Golubev]

I don't know sorry.

[poruchik]

to change, to change, to change for youself

or take templates - see ONIX

[yano125]

ZUP Visual Pattern History

karmostaji:
One question (I hope you don't mind)

Is the default setting good to use? or do I have to change some? for example if I want the previous patterns to show as well?

Thanks

Karmo and to the others who wish to see Visual History of Patterns created by the ZUP Indicator...

Attached is ZUP_v73 and the template I use. I have not really checked out the settings yet to use also on ZUP_v77. But I assume they should be the same.

Maybe somebody can do this for ZUP_v77?

There is something I also can not do yet. Maybe somebody knows which one to set among the parameters so that we can also see the RED Box Price Range Target for each of the pattern it finds.

[poruchik]

You must have 67 ZUP in MT

[[Deleted]]

A Harmonic Pattern question...

I just purchased and read Scott Carney's excellent Harmonic Trading books. Here's an email I just sent to him for comment, based on my first attack at understanding Gartley's... maybe someone here has some wisdom too:

"I'm a novice Harmonic Trader, but not a novice trader. I've been trying to work through your 'rules' for pattern ID in a systematic and visual way, so that the knowledge is embedded in my brain. With that in mind, I re-interpreted the Bullish Gartley diagram (attached) so I could come to terms with the reversal points and have hit a problem that I was hoping you could clarify for me...?

Given that the C point can legitimately form anywhere between 0.382 and 0.886 of AB (shown as the C zone), and that our D point can legitimately form anywhere between 1.27 and 1.618 of AB (the D zone) ... How can D ALSO obey the requirement of forming exactly at 0.786 of XA?

1.618 of AB takes it way beyond 0.786 of XA, surely? Particularly if C has turned at 0.386 of AB in the first place...

In other words, C at 0.386 AB + D at 1.618 AB = approx 100% of XA

I'm confused. What am I not understanding?

Respectfully"

[yano125]

poruchik:
You must have 67 ZUP in MT

Thank you Poruchik.

This is what I was looking for..... the boxed targets of past patterns.

Yano