Skip to main content
Track Candlestick patterns
38 / 54
Search the archiveLibrary
Library

2013issue C0726-32

Step candle construction at price turning points

A two-candle step is marked at a high-low zigzag turning point when the second body opens inside the prior body and closes beyond it. A gap between the bodies is treated as a stronger form of the same construction, not as a separate pattern class.

  • The step construction is checked at high-low zigzag turning points, not anywhere on the chart or only with moving averages.
  • An upstep or downstep requires the second body to open inside or equal to the prior body and close beyond it; a body gap is a stronger form of the same rule.
  • Preferring the step definition at turning points often completely or partly masks other named candlestick constructions on the same bars.
  • Candlestick recognition at a turning point is one rule inside the irsts swing framework, not a complete standalone system.
Entries in this reading1 entry
Current trackCandlestick patterns100 readings

Locate the turning point first

The step construction is checked at high-low zigzag turning points rather than anywhere on the chart or only in combination with moving averages. On a daily chart, the high-low zigzag used to locate those turning points requires at least a 10 percent move between successive highs and lows.

Build an upstep after a pivot low

An upstep is a white or green candle at or after a pivot low. It opens inside or equal to the low side of the previous body and closes above the upper side of that previous body. The first candle may be either color.

The upstep has four enumerated bar-color sequences. All four keep the same inside-open and beyond-close relationship to the prior body.

Build a downstep after a pivot high

A downstep is a black or red candle at or after a pivot high. It opens inside or equal to the high side of the previous body and closes below the lower side of that previous body. The first candle may be either color.

The downstep likewise has four enumerated sequences. They preserve the same inside-open and beyond-close relationship on the opposite side of the prior body.

Treat a body gap as the same construction

A gap between the two consecutive bodies is a valid and stronger form of the same upstep or downstep construction, not a separate pattern class. The open-inside and close-beyond logic still applies when the two bodies do not overlap.

Pattern masking at the same bars

Preferring the step definition at turning points often completely or partly masks other named candlestick constructions that occupy the same bars. On one five-year example chart, 45 harami markings, 85 step markings, and 127 combined step, engulfing, and harami markings were counted.

One rule inside the irsts framework

Candlestick recognition at turning points is presented as one rule inside the irsts swing framework, not as a complete standalone system.

Pattern counts at Ford zigzag turns

On the same five-year daily Ford Motor test with a 10% high-low zigzag, step constructions printed 85 times, versus 45 harami and 28 engulfing events. Scanning all four families together found 127 prints, not the 158 you get by adding the three groups, which is the masking the article describes. These four totals are the figures the author states in the text for that test.
On the same five-year daily Ford Motor test with a 10% high-low zigzag, step constructions printed 85 times, versus 45 harami and 28 engulfing events. Scanning all four families together found 127 prints, not the 158 you get by adding the three groups, which is the masking the article describes. These four totals are the figures the author states in the text for that test.Ford Motor (F) · Daily, five-year window

Daily Ford Motor (F) bars and a 10% high-low zigzag. The four bars are CandlePattern settings 2, 3, 1, and 9. The combined count is smaller than the sum because a step at a pivot often occupies the same bars as an engulfing or harami.

Educational research material, not investment advice. Historical source context does not establish present-day performance.
38 of 54 in the Candlestick patterns track
201344-48 pp.Next on Candlestick patternsTwo-bar step-candle constructionA two-bar step-candle can be built from ordinary open, high, low, and close values instead of a packaged pattern system.
All readings on this track · 54 readings
  1. 1990Constructing three-session rally and reaction volume signals
  2. 1991Constructing candlestick real bodies and multi-session patterns
  3. 1991Treat a candlestick reversal as incomplete until %D confirms it
  4. 1991Filtering candlestick signals with stochastic percent-D
  5. 1991Constructing compressed candlestick summaries
  6. 1993Intraday candlestick confirmation with oscillators
  7. 1993Candlestick hypotheses from a 1993 reading list
  8. 1994License candlestick signals with oscillators and weekly vetoes
  9. 1995Real-body support, resistance, and close-through breakouts
  10. 1997Weekly reversal as a three-part hypothesis
  11. 1998Turning fear levels into testable rules with a psychological matrix
  12. 2000Evaluating three-bar reversal reliability
  13. 2000Prior-day candles, open confirmation, and same-session stops
  14. 2000Intraday candlestick volume confirmation for daytrading
  15. 2001Count the key reversal up before coding a mechanical exit
  16. 2001Rising and falling three continuation candle construction
  17. 2002Treat a moving average as a contested fence
  18. 2003Candlestick signals need support and a risk-reward screen
  19. 2003Constructing one-day reversal tops and bottoms
  20. 2003Chart sentiment as a regime filter for hourly stochastic entries
  21. 2004Confirming index reversals with candlesticks, stochastics and averages
  22. 2004The harami inner close as a reversal barometer
  23. 2004Constructing a true-range volume power-shift filter
  24. 2005Weighing reversal clusters against moving-average support
  25. 2005Candlestick exits confirmed by overbought stochastics
  26. 2005Confirming piercing patterns with stochastics and moving averages
  27. 2006Candlestick cluster exits confirmed by overbought stochastics
  28. 2007Three black crows become a trade hypothesis only after regime, trend and nearby levels
  29. 2008Asymmetrical RSI lookbacks for divergence and candle confirmation
  30. 2008A permission checklist for the end of a trend
  31. 2010Mechanical entries still need confirmation gates
  32. 2010Crude oil as a case study in candlestick session reading
  33. 2010Gold weekly candles and the thousand resistance breakout
  34. 2010A three-layer gold chart drill from waves to candle confirmation
  35. 2011Why entry scans fail without trend filters
  36. 2011Price-zone oscillator trend-regime rules
  37. 2011A candlestick checklist before commodity entries
  38. 2013Step candle construction at price turning points
  39. 2013Two-bar step-candle construction
  40. 2014Small-range bars as a timed volume-climax hypothesis
  41. 2014Constructing volume-scaled candlestick charts
  42. 2015Weekly range midpoints as support and resistance
  43. 2015Constructing weekly body-midpoint pattern codes
  44. 2015Evaluating encoded candlestick sequence hypotheses
  45. 2015Constructing a breakout relative-strength index from two-day range candles
  46. 2016A three-gate classroom on hourly sterling
  47. 2016Fibonacci retracement as a pre-commitment stop map
  48. 2017Nine-zone filter for decade-level breakouts
  49. 2017Constructing pin-bar and inside-bar setups
  50. 2017Two-bar soldier and crow rules become a system only after filters and exits
  51. 2017Confirm a one-white-soldier or one-black-crow before entry
  52. 2018Session control from marubozu and engulfing geometry
  53. 2019Volume, acceleration, and candle filters on a completed double bottom
  54. 2019Sector-filtered candlestick scans and predrawn stops
By fieldChart patterns222 readingsBy year201398 readings
All 100 readings tagged Candlestick patterns
Also on Candlestick patterns5 readings
1988Constructing directional movement from bar range1989Next-session opening-range rules after a bear hook1989Inside-day contraction as a same-session open-to-close rule1989Packaging two-bar reversals into testable entry and exit rules1990Constructing three-session rally and reaction volume signals