Bearish butterfly on the GBPJPY Daily, 1.272/1.618 convergence. If me make it past 146.000 that is. Testing a resistance from april 2010.
I have the exact same thing, but I drew mine in 4 hr. Same exact convergence zone for daily so could be a good trade 
This trade was successful. Since iāve decreased my TP to only 20 pips i baged them easily. But even 30 pips would not have been a problem. Hope you didnāt miss out on this oportunity.
Nice one man, congrats. I got in as well but wasnāt in front of the screen. From my phone I saw it up 20 pips, so I put in a stop to BE and when I checked again it stopped me out, that sucks! 
Still, great trade.
Thanks! 
Ahh, to bad. But there is another trade just waiting around the corner waiting to be traded. 
Looks like my bigger trade i posted earlier on the GBPUSD daily is working as planned too.
TMB, just a quick question if you donāt mind.
Letās say you identify a buy pattern Gartley from convergence of two different fibs. Do you place your entry order:
[ol]
[li]A few pips above the highest fib
[/li][li]At the price of the highets fib
[/li][li]At the price of the lowest fib
[/li][li]Somewhere else
[/li][li]
[/li][/ol]
Thank you
What do you think of this one?
NZDUSD 30 min. Bullish gartley with nice convergence and āfibonacci clusterā at 0.84104 (1.272, 0.382 & 0.500)
What i did to get the third fib level (0.500) was draw a fib from B to A. And then move it (0.0) to the wick of B.
Hmmm interesting chart!
For me, I like to keep it simple and just follow the original Gartley rules so there are two other convergence areas I get:
I donāt trade NZDUSD yet, but might even consider one of these 
Why is it so easy to lose so much money so quickly? Iām already down 76 pips for the day and Iām only like 5 hours in. Its like, I enter a trade that looks good, Iām at least 2:1 or better and I donāt change anything. 5 minutes later, bam, price drops and Iām out. Iām not scalping here. Price never seems to go bam, target hit, bam, target him, bam, stopped out, bam three more times, targets hit. If thereās a 50% chance of picking the right direction, then why is it that itās so easy to get into trades that lose and so hard to get into trades that actually profit?
Theoretically the trade has a 50/50 chance of going one way or another at any instant. It doesnāt have a 50% chance of reaching a certain target though, especially if a target is double what you are willing to risk. If it was a truly random walk, then the chance of reaching a target 2x away are much less than half of the chance of reaching your stop loss in the other direction. Thatās why all these other tools come into play.
Well it is a simple gartley that i drew with convergence at the 1.272/0.382 when i drew X from the base of price.
Just added another fib to ger some more āconfirmationā on that level. I understand if it suddenly looks more complex.
I totally agree with you to keep things simple. But itās nice with something else that confirms a certain level.
Yeah itās definitely a nice chart you have there. I am definitely not drawing my fibs from the base price or MVA yet because Iām still following the book Trade What You See but itās clear that these approaches have resulted in good gains.
I just realized that my aversion to these methods might be from an experience a couple years ago. I was playing around with fibs and ended up āprice fittingā my fibs to such an extent that I just destroyed my account
Looking back, I was very stupid to do that and it was a lot of wishful thinking. Part of my new year is āresettingā, mastering the basics for myself and then taking it from there. Thereās SO much good stuff on here, oh man, Iāll never get to all of it! Keep sharing my friend, itās good!
Joesfx150, instead of answering your question, I think it would just be best to give you some practical advice which in turn might lead to much deeper psychological realizations on your part.
So simply, would you please post your two trades here with screenshots, why you entered the trade and where you got stopped out?
Thanks, letās try to help you out of this hole
Cheers
Of all the tools for predicting reversals with harmonics, one of the most important measures of whether a fib zone is valid or not is whether the XA selection is such that the fib levels are being respected.
What does this mean though? TMB posted a week or so back about deciding to place X at the wick or at the 7 candle MVA based on which one produced fib levels which are more respected. In some cases one X is clearly better than another, with major peaks or double tops wicking off an important fib line. In others, you could find support for either reading correctly. For, example, the green fibs here are drawn from the MVA, while the brick red ones are from the wick. The difference between the two is a dozen pips, which is a decent amount on the H1 scale. Which ones are being more respectful?
In the beginning of the thread, the wick to wick method seemed to be working just fine as long as multiple XAs have major lines around that zone. Between drawing X at MVAs, the base and the wick you could easily find every zone has convergence. How are you experienced traders avoiding this?
Hi merper,
Diablo and I indirectly touched on this subject just now. I would not dare be arrogant enough to call myself an experienced trader but I feel that I have an answer, even if it is just for myself.
I would choose one way of drawing it and keep doing this until you are consistently profitable with this. Obviously, this means you will skip trades that converged with the other methods of drawing XA and you make peace with that. My trades are the ones that line up perfectly when I draw it wick to wick.
If I keep drawing 100ās of fibs, I just completely confuse myself to the point of paralysis, where I canāt do anything good anymore. Therefore the reason for choosing one and patiently waiting for setups to form.
Just my 2c
Cyanidez, Iām glad to hear that the good results youāve gotten last month came from following the traditional reading of the rules(hmm, this suddenly sounds so religious). I think I am trying to incorporate all this new stuff too fast, and am ending up, as you say, fitting my fibs to prior support and resistance peaks. The end result is that I am essentially using only support and resistance lines as my sole indicator.
EDIT: Guess we caught each otherās post at the same time, haha. I think if youāve been trading fibs for a year and destroyed an account or two, you are definitely experienced, so I do value your opinion greatly.
So using the wick-wick method, do you do a quality check to see if thereās reaction to the pre-1.00 fib levels, or do you mostly just look at the convergence quality or the candlestick patterns by that fib and take it from there?
This is really odd. If i draw the fibs exactly from the same points as you do i do not get any convergence whatsoever except of the one i mentioned earlier. Strange. Did i do anything different?
Yeah i exactly understand what you mean with trying to force a convergence when there isnāt one. I think i might be heading for that trap myself. But i would not take a trade where XA is drawn from base of price or MVA without anything else (trend line, resistance/support) confirming that there really is some resistance support.
I have been asking myself when and why to change a fib from wick to base or MVA. Thanks Merper for pointing out what TMB said about that. I totally missed the āwhyā and āwhenā earlier.
Right now iām just experimenting around to find out which one is the most consistent method. But of course following the old school from ātrade what you seeā canāt be wrong, just result in less trades which of course isnāt a bad thing, more likely the other way around. The ābase of priceā and āMVAā is just a twitch that TMB added as he found out it was producing good trades as well.
Thnx for your great thoughts on this guys. Bedtime for me in Sweden. Good night!
Little bit confused about this, isnāt harmonic trading āTrade when the pattern is completedā? Is this essentially shorting, expecting the D point to act like a magnet to the price? Without asking for you to repeat too much stuff already probably covered in this large thread, where abouts are you entering and putting SL in this type of trade
To be honest until now i do not have any good experience going short or long from C to D. Mostly because iām not totally faimiliar with what rules apply, when and why D will become a āmagnetā like you say. Normally there has to be a pattern on a lower timeframe that will push price up or down towards D and then you have a valid entry.
For now i only take trades at the completion of point D. But i think many in this thread can give you a better explanation since they trade in that way.
Letās see. Two of the trades i posted yesterday have triggered.
First of we have the GBP AUD 1H on which i got stopped out because price continued 20 pips through the convergence and THEN turned around. A stoploss of 25 pips there would have save me, but since my TP at the moment is 20 pips i will keep my risk/reward ratio at 1:1. Too bad. 
And then we have the NZDUSD 1H where price hit my limit order but it got not triggered. I guess i forgot to count in the spread which is bigger on this pair. I entered manually instead since i was lucky to just be in front of the computer at the right time. Now we just have to see if it hits my TP or not. Right now itās looking good.
EDIT: Price made a strong move upwards and hit my TP. So good trade on that one, +20 pips.
Have a nice trading day everyone and good luck!!