My dear Narayana:
You seem to be playing a perpetual game of "gotcha" with me. Apparently you think that my interpretations of the market's activity are simply ex post facto rationalizations of my irrational (to you) bullish market view. Thus you delight in pointing out what you see as inconsistencies in my interpretations of volume, advancing issues numbers, etc.
But you don't seem to appreciate the fact that the significance of market action arises from the context within which it occurs. The same type of action can have a very different implication early in a trend from the one it has late in a trend.
In the present example the e-minis have been locked in a 25 point trading range for the past 9 trading sessions. During any sideways movement volume normally contracts. Indeed, after an extended advance such as the one we have seen from the March lows one should worry if volume does NOT contract within a trading range. High volume in a trading range after a long uptrend would be a significant sign of impending weakness. In any event, any extended trend generally ends in high volume that develops near its extreme, often during the first stages of the reversal move in the opposite direction.
So there is nothing inconsistent in my failure to mention the low volume on rallies within the trading range. It is high volume within a trading range that would concern me.