Why is Push not Refresh?
Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:13 am
I realize that as students of the P&L School we're not to get stuck on the details of the lessons--and that the principles of Drummond Geometry are what is important; but in Lesson 1 Section 4 screen 15--regarding the weekly pork belly chart--the third (3rd) bar from the left of the chart is described as: "We see a bit of a push to the upside, but this move quickly ran out of steam and returned to the PL Dot. There was no refresh of energy to the upside but instead the energy of the PL Dot pushed strongly to the downside."
Question: Why is the "push" above the PL Dot not described as a refresh? The third (3rd) bar is described as pushing strongly to the downside; well, doesn't it mean that when the bar returned to the PL Dot and passed it on the upside that this pattern is described a PL Dot refresh? What have I overlooked in the lessons (so far) that would have told me that this WAS a "PL Dot" push to the upside and not a "PL Dot" refresh to the upside?
-----------------
Also, are the P&L lessons the kind of lessons which should be mastered before moving on to the more advanced lessons. By mastered I mean should I be able to answer all of Lesson One "Section four's" questions 100% accurately before moving on to lesson two (2)? Or Will lesson two HELP me understand lesson one better -- and will lesson 3 HELP me understand lesson two better, etc? Perhaps what I'm really asking is if you have additional thoughts on the best way to study the lessons to get the most from them, besides what's mentioned in the course materials?
I say this because after reviewing lesson one (1), (it's where I am now, for the fifth (5th) time, the more insight into lesson one (1) I gain; but I'm wondering if my study of lesson one (1) really comes together after studying lesson two (2) and will my study of lesson two (2) make more sense after studying lesson three (3), etc. How do I know if I'm spending too much time on one lesson?
With all that said, Mr. Hearne, my thoughts on the P&L School of Drummond Geometry and what I want from it are: If the Drummond lessons will truly teach me how to trade, then I'll be able to trade for the rest of my life and in the words of John Hill, " Possibly come away with an understanding of Market Dynamics which is second to none." So whatever it takes for me to master the P&L trading tools, I'm ready for it ; (already I envision myself studying the P&L course a minimum of two (2) years to become competent with the tools of trading; and I'll add another three (3) years of dedicated trading and reviewing of the lessons, trading and reviewing of the lessons, trading and reviewing of the lessons to feel I OWN the tools of how to trade the Drummond Geometry way.
A.D.
Question: Why is the "push" above the PL Dot not described as a refresh? The third (3rd) bar is described as pushing strongly to the downside; well, doesn't it mean that when the bar returned to the PL Dot and passed it on the upside that this pattern is described a PL Dot refresh? What have I overlooked in the lessons (so far) that would have told me that this WAS a "PL Dot" push to the upside and not a "PL Dot" refresh to the upside?
-----------------
Also, are the P&L lessons the kind of lessons which should be mastered before moving on to the more advanced lessons. By mastered I mean should I be able to answer all of Lesson One "Section four's" questions 100% accurately before moving on to lesson two (2)? Or Will lesson two HELP me understand lesson one better -- and will lesson 3 HELP me understand lesson two better, etc? Perhaps what I'm really asking is if you have additional thoughts on the best way to study the lessons to get the most from them, besides what's mentioned in the course materials?
I say this because after reviewing lesson one (1), (it's where I am now, for the fifth (5th) time, the more insight into lesson one (1) I gain; but I'm wondering if my study of lesson one (1) really comes together after studying lesson two (2) and will my study of lesson two (2) make more sense after studying lesson three (3), etc. How do I know if I'm spending too much time on one lesson?
With all that said, Mr. Hearne, my thoughts on the P&L School of Drummond Geometry and what I want from it are: If the Drummond lessons will truly teach me how to trade, then I'll be able to trade for the rest of my life and in the words of John Hill, " Possibly come away with an understanding of Market Dynamics which is second to none." So whatever it takes for me to master the P&L trading tools, I'm ready for it ; (already I envision myself studying the P&L course a minimum of two (2) years to become competent with the tools of trading; and I'll add another three (3) years of dedicated trading and reviewing of the lessons, trading and reviewing of the lessons, trading and reviewing of the lessons to feel I OWN the tools of how to trade the Drummond Geometry way.
A.D.