Thursday, March 14, 2019

Re-examination of a last option for Minute ((c))

The idea of violating Neely's guideline regarding wave three being entirely above the 0 - 2 trend line is and was still disturbing. So, in the work of Elliott Wave, I took a look with fresh eyes, and found that one of our commenters had posted the best solution. That solution is shown below, and it was first posted by Erik B. I couldn't see the entire chart at the time, and couldn't see the entire count in my mind, but now it is pretty clear.  So, before I post the chart let me give kudos and full credit to Erik for this idea.

S&P500 Cash Index - Four Hourly - Ending Diagonal Minute ((c)) Wave

What makes this chart possible is the clear and unmistakable zigzag down from the Mar 4th high. And yesterday's higher high reinforces a potential diagonal pattern.

Because minute ((c)) is not yet 62% x minute ((a)), then there is no degree violation between (i) of ((c)) and minute ((a)). There is also not a 'time' violation between (ii) of ((c)) and minute ((b)), but there is definitely a price violation between (ii) of ((c)), and minute ((b)). Now, the question is, does that matter in a zigzag? After all, we are not counting increasing extensions within a third wave in this count.

Importantly - all of the wave 3's are above their respective 0 - 2 trend lines. Yay! Again, will all thanks and due credit paid to Erik.

Have a good start to the day.
TraderJoe

29 comments:

  1. "So, before I post the chart let me give kudos and full credit to Billy for this idea" ~ yes kudos to Billy for a job well done...also, kudos to Joe for being honorable!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We still need to see if that degree violation matters in price. If we go below (ii) then minute ((a)) up has to become the count. Time will tell.

      Delete
  2. Thanks for the acknowledgement however the original creator of this proposed count was not me. It was in fact Erik B. Nice going Erik!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here's the link to Erik's original chart.
      https://imgur.com/gallery/YLmAjgM

      Delete
    2. kudos to Billy for being honorable! today more than ever, honor and integrity should be valued!

      Delete
    3. Thanks Billy, and TJ for taking the time to look at my chart, glad it still works! :)

      Delete
  3. Joe, there is one other count that doesn't violate a 0-2 line. That would be to count 2347-2790 as 5 waves up. Wave i was the extended wave. Then a corrective wave from 2790-2722. Then another 5 waves up to yesterday's high. The bearish count of that formation would be a completed abc. The bullish count would be 1-2-i.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not viable because an EDT has to subdivide 3:3:3:3:3.

      Delete
  6. SP has LD down and establishing new 0-2 line. Perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  7. count is not valid. a to b covers more points than circle a to circle b.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. a-b have more points but less time. It is necessary that exist a proportion in time or in price. ((a))-((b)) takes more time than the other lower degree corrections, but less points when is a sideways triangle or flat.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. circle b wouldn't need take more points but it likely should than i to ii or iii to iv.

      it also wouldn't need take more time but it again likely should.

      if a to b is allowed to take more in points than circle a to circle b then there is simply something about how c waves are allowed to extend that i am not understanding. if you measure the largest width of the triangle of the move from circle a to circle b the move from a to b does respect that.

      interested to see how this plays out.

      Delete
  8. Weekly chart possible hidden rsi divergence.

    Thanks for updated chart.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Excellent, a new count every day. One will be correct eventually, possibly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. kind of like you will be correct one day eventually, possibly of the crash related to number 7s?

      No hard feelings. This is all about probabilities. Perhaps the blog will one day how primary and secondary counts to convey the high vs less probability alternatives so we're not going through counts like a deck of cards.

      Delete
    2. dumnonia you are worse with your prediction of crash which are imaginere

      Delete
    3. dom, are you the twin sister of ratrot? So similar.

      Delete
  10. It is very hard to dismiss how "slow" the markets are right now. It is very easy to be incorrect in the short run when there are few impulse moves. Here is one idea on the Dow, from it's recent low.

    https://invst.ly/aa8kh

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dow held its potential triangle into the cash close.

      Delete
  11. ET what if any insight did you get from the study of the russell 2000?

    ReplyDelete
  12. A new post has been started for the next day.

    ReplyDelete