BLVN

colebrooke1,

all gaps are closed. You need to take the high on 21/2, not the close to determine gaps. The previous days range is also a factor.

F4T

A picture paints a thousand words

Food4Thought wrote: colebrooke1,

all gaps are closed. You need to take the high on 21/2, not the close to determine gaps. The previous days range is also a factor.

F4T

It also depends on how you trade the gaps.
some people like to trade the gaps using the windows method(most popular and recommended) and others like to use it from a total fill perspective. Both ways work. what i mean by the total fill is the price gapped up and left a visible empty space.This empty space can be traded on the fill itself from the start of the space in the future.(dont know if that makes sense). Just like the fill on BLVN yesterday. It went perfectly to fill the gap and bounced a little on first attempt basis. If your after just a few points then this can be profitable.

Yes remo, but only if the horizontal line drawn to illustrate it is drawn in the correct place.

The gap was filled at ~78p on 26/2, not at ~76.50 on 27/2 as per your chart remo. You have not accounted for the wicks for once

Also, in some interpretations there was deemed no gap at all because the range of the prior day (20/2) covered the gap area, but that is advanced TA.

F4T

Ps: Have just read your second post. I find it odd that you are adamant about drawing trendlines using the wicks but advocate a gap close based on the real body. Personally I have never heard of someone closing gaps based on real bodies before. There are some odd interpretations advocated on here IMO. It is important IMO to always use the most commonly used, as with trendlines. Each to their own I suppose.

Thats my point there are different methods to trading the gap. Some people dont use the wicks.
With trading there is no one way that is absolute.
The wick was left out purposely.

The wicks are used in windows trading