TC2000.com• Download software • Tutorial videos • Subscription & data-feed pricing • Class schedule

TC2000Brokerage.com• New account application • Trading resources • Margin rates • Stock & option commissions

Worden Discussion Forum » Customer Training & Support » Ask a Trainer - TC2000 version 12/18 » question

Hey Bruce

Is there a way to extend the offset moving average to the right of the chart like how ichimoku Lead A and Lead B extends to the forward periods ??

thanks

Also Bruce how do u place dot plot onto the side of the bar of high or low of price instead of exact high or low if condition is true, i know u have done this in past for couple of my pcf's but i can't figure out

No, there isn't a way to extend the offset to the right.

About the closest thing you can do is offset everything else to the left (which if you don't offset what you wanted to shift to the right will mean it extends out beyond the right edge of everything else which has been shifted to the left).

The biggest issue with this, is that you can't plot price as a shifted plot using normal price plot styles such as candlesticks, HLC Bars, and OHLC Bars.

I generally just add, subtract, multiply, or divide the high or low by some arbitraririly value designed to make the dot plot close to the high or low without actually plotting at exactly the same value.

Oh Ok

Thanks Bruce

Bruce quick question -- I want a new Spike when below criteria meets

1) Price Close today above the HIGH of the formula when below formula was true in past for its most recent spike

Sorry, but no. It is has the same problem as all of the other programs where you want to find the value when some really long formula was true in the past. The formulas are way to long to be practical. Seriously, the formulas are exponentially larger than these formulas and are too slow to calculate.

Alrite Bruce No worries , but let me ask this if possible -

From my above formula #1 when pcf was TRUE in most recent spike So can a new pcf starts plotting dot on HIGH of the bar PARALLEL to the right until the next Spike appears PLEASE SEE THE IMAGE LINK https://www.dhirenshah.com/spike-low/

And same

From my above Formula #2 when pcf was True in most recent Spike so can a new PCF start plotting dot on LOW of the bar Parallel to the right until the next spike appears PLEASE SEE THE IMAGE LINK

https://www.dhirenshah.com/spike-high/

Thanks

No, it really, really can't.

See the big long formula? It is essentially this fomula repeated 100 times with some structure around it at each one of those points.

MINL2 > L2 AND L2 < MINL2.3

OK. now imagine substituting the big long formula in for that really short formula... 100 times. You really can't do this sort of thing in the current version of the PCF Language.

Okay Bruce thanks

Have great weekend

Hi Bruce

I understand what u said last week but

Re-visiting this question I managed plot the dots as my request using SINCE TRUE function

Now my only problem is i need to the get rid of the dot plot below the zero white lline and scale them to the price

I used dot formulas as below also you can see the visual of what i wanted , please click the link

https://www.dhirenshah.com/spike-dots/

BEIGE DOTS formula i used using since true function

If we could use the SinceTrue() function the way you want to shorten the formula, we could write the first formula in your Friday, January 11, 2019 4:41:29 AM ET post as follows.

C < C(SinceTrue(MINL2 > L2 AND L2 < MINL2.3, 100)

The reason we have these big long formula in the first place is because the offset (bars ago) parameter has to be a number and not a formula.

Bruce the formula that you wrote does not match with my spikes or dots or is it partial formula that you wrote

My problem is when i overlay the lower pane and scale with price the dots vanishes ... and if i plot them by itself they don't line up with price hence i just needed tweak there

The formula it my Monday, January 14, 2019 2:09:12 PM ET post won't work. That is the point. You can't use formulas as the bars ago parameter for an indicator. If you could, we wouldn't need these really long formulas.

If you want to convert SinceTrue() into a value, you would need to be able to use it as the bars ago parameter as part of the syntax for an indicator.

I can't "tweak" your formula to make it return a value for all of the same reasons I have given previously.

Alrite Bruce I just have one last question and i will close this topic promise ,

How did u do this below formula for resistance and support where when placed as offset by -3 it plots dots on 5 bars ongoing basis until new one comes in so can't that be replaced to my requirements of the above query

resistance

That is an older method I used before the IIF() function which ends up being about twice as long.

Here is how it works.

ABS(MAXH3 < H3 AND H3 > MAXH3.4) returns 1 when MAXH3 < H3 AND H3 > MAXH3.4 is true and zero when it is false.. So if it is true, we multiply 1 by H3 and if it is false when multiply 0 by H3.

ABS(MAXH3 < H3 AND H3 > MAXH3.4)

MAXH3 < H3 AND H3 > MAXH3.4

H3

Then the next section checks if the opposite is true. So MAXH3 >= H3 OR H3 <= MAXH3.4 will be true when the other formula is false and false when the other formula is true. Now we put an opening parenthesis after this so we can multiply the entire rest of the formula by this "opposite" formula.

MAXH3 >= H3 OR H3 <= MAXH3.4

What this does is makes it so the rest of the formula gets multiplied by zero if the first part got multiplied by 1 (making it so the rest of the formula may as well not even be there) and multiplies it be 1 if the first part got multiplied by zero.

This same basic structure gets nested inside of each other with the next set of two formulas being a version from one more bar in the past.

So this is essentially the same as this structure, but in a much longer way.

IIF(MAXH3 < H3 AND H3 > MAXH3.4, H3, rest of formula here repeating same structure for as many bars as you want to look into the past)

IIF(MAXH3 < H3 AND H3 > MAXH3.4, H3,

)

Both techniques require making different versions of the formula for as many bars as you want to actually check.

Okay so without going to far can we go upto 20 bars back to replace the idea with my formulas ?

bruce No luck yet writing the 20 bar look back yet ??

I have worked on it (I spent more time on it than I should have actually), but it is both quite complicated to create (I had to generate the formula for each of the 20 bars separately and put them together manually) and it still ends up too long and slow to be practical or post in the forums.

I will try to figure out a different way, but putting one of these long formulas inside another one of these long formulas is quite a bit more difficult than you seem to think.