the golden gun said:can't comment on the divergences personally, but sure did see this mitigation block. Precise entry defined by the 1H order block, shown with blue line.
PS. you've bested me again rod178! you're quite a good trader aren't you? :hail:
rod178 said:LOL, only when I stick to trading the LOKZ.
Good point about the Mitigation Block, which I must admit I've been too lazy to study up on.
I just look at the Mitigation Block as an area of congestion, like a zone of Support. All the same thing I suppose(?)
the golden gun said:great analysis, but your fill suggests that you made the trade first, then did the analysis lol
the golden gun said:No, it's just as precise as the OB, the key levels of course being the Open and Close. I love it, the concept is basically "damage control" by the players big enough to move the market (lookin at you CBs). Their positions go Negative, but luckily they ARE the market so they take it back down to BE and collapse positions. It works best when one side of the market clearly got caught with their pants down and will need to scramble to get out. That's my take on it, worth the study.
marzullo63 said:The was also an OB and 15M SMT the other way around, with major trend, with stop run, OTE 79%, major S&R level, big figure, time of the day, etc..., but the price didn't turn. In other words a short at 1.52 middle morning 9:25 GMT, stopped out. Guys you should post your losing trades even more than the winning ones.
On the contrary, short NU at 0.7447 with "similar" premises:
Stop Run, SMT 15M, S&R level, OB-, major trend, middle figure, Time of the day, OTE 79%, closed on LC, +4%.
Now what works and what doesn't, difficult to say but as long as the equity grows, there is hope.
the golden gun said:I've been noticing, just in the last few days that SMT has regained popularity, that the setups where SMT is being identified and bet on Live, are ending up in Loss. It seems the only successful examples are being shown in hindsight... after the move already occurs. Which suggests to me people are more interested in *proving* that the tool works, than actually judging it objectively.
Not to mention the fact that whenever ICT highlights a concept, there is always an absurd OVERUSE of the concept in the days following. ICT talks about SMT, suddently everyone sees SMT divergence everywhere! Think that's a coincidence?
Plenty of people guilty of not thinking for themselves 'round here >
Jack said:Sounds more like a filter or confirmation trigger is needed... seeing a divergence in general (as with ALL divergence trading,) doesn't mean much as they happen all the time.
What does ICT use along with the divergence for SMT setups?
sqa said:Straight from my notes on the Webinar:
"We don't pop up Charts LOOKING for SMT Divergence. It's a confirmation Tool." It's a final filter that ICT uses most of the time, at least for the bigger move-type trades.