Thursday, September 5, 2019

Different Day, Same Drill - 2

I simply can not keep repeating myself over & over. These are the best two counts with about equal odds. The first one is that Minor 2, upward, is nearly completed.

ES - Daily - Minor 2

The above count is based on 1) trend lines and back-test of trend lines, 2) the waves as I counted them internally at the time, and 3) nearness to the upper resistance level.

But, because the Intermediate (B) wave did not reach 1.382 x the Intermediate (A) wave, there is still a chance it could. See the weekend video if you have questions about why we are looking for the Intermediate (B) wave.



ES - Daily - Triangle X

This count suggests a "pre-terminal triangle" as an X wave, and allows Intermediate (B) to attain 1.382 x Intermediate (A) if it so wishes. It would be great to see a triangle to identify clearly where we are. I have only a slight preference for the first count over the second. Both are valid or could be. The triangle's minute ((e)) wave would be only required to cross over the Minor W wave to confirm that the running triangle is corrective to the Minor W wave, and then price must break out of the triangle.

Please, please, please do not ask me to re-explain these scenarios. If you don't understand them, please refer to video posted this past Sunday. And, please, like some, don't say I didn't see either one coming.

Thanks and have a good evening,
TraderJoe


49 comments:

  1. Joe, Thank you!
    It is beyond me why folks would go to all the trouble of reading what you have written only to complain - yet that is what it sounds like has happened at least occasionally. Please don't let those folks discourage you - I and I am sure others, appreciate very much your posts. There is no reason to expect you to be clairvoyant - I have found all your posts to be very helpful exactly as they are.
    Thanks again!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice to hear .. and thanks for saying. I am definitely not a 'seer', but just try to count the waves.

      Delete
  2. Benefit of 30 years, take it at face value. I know EW, not like you, but I know it. It doesn't work. It's a fantasy and a labeling system other than when you're right. You feel good and refreshed when the count is finally correct - you're vindicated. The problem is most traders don't realize they're wrong the majority of the time using this technique. Can't see the forest from the trees. I've been getting this from you for years. You don't realize what you can't see. You bat about 30%. You're a very good analyst who is using a flawed technique that you can't make money with. Why is it flawed? You think it's perfect because there is always a perfect count, yet in reality most people don't realize they're constantly changing charts and counts to fit the market into what they think it is. It's backwards. Sometimes getting it from a spectator who knows the game is painful, but necessary. I realize the market is going to have a huge leg down, but you've been looking for it for a long time. Why? Because you believe in a technique that can never be wrong if you change the count.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya. I hear that criticism a lot ag. I address it in my book. Fact is, there were a lot of things wrong with the 'method' I was using to count. I have found three simple techniques that have corrected 90 - 95% of the problems. So, the counts are getting better, more reliable. However, EW is in fact structured so that a diagonal can be both 'leading' and 'ending' as one example. And, where the exact same wave structure gives exactly opposite interpretations that one has simply to 'lighten up' on the drama or the 'confidence' in a call. So, in that sense you are 'somewhat' correct that the technique is flawed. I agree with you there - and in some other times when alternate paths are clearly possible (triangle or flat).

      Sometimes, gap direction helps. But, personally, I like to sleep at night so if there is a +35 point gap or a -35 point gap overnight, I may not see it or much of it until morning.

      Do I care? Not much while the market is in 'wait and see' mode. What I can tell you is that there is a lot of 'opinion-based' traders out there. Ask them to explain what they do, or more so, why, and they can't. I work with measurements to take some of the opinion out of it.

      You know what they say about opinions.

      Delete
    2. ET, I wanted you to know that what I have learned from you has allowed me to go part-time at work. Cannot thank you enough!!!!

      Delete
  3. You have a way of making the complex seem simple (True sign of intelligence). The 8 Step is part of my routine. I check your site several times a week. Thank You!!
    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  4. I trust from Y to 1 is 5 waves in 1st chart. If so, would not b to c also be in the 2nd chart? A 5 wave leg in a triangle?
    Just wanting to clarify.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Y to 1 is five waves. It sure looks it in the Dow cash and the ES futures. If correct it's one of the factors that makes the triangle the alternate. The others were covered in Sunday's video.

      Delete
  5. Gold has completed impulse down off the top with a contracting diagonal in the overnight.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey et. So from Y to 1 is 5 waves? In your triangle scenario it's three waves. Am I missing something?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi ET,
    What propability do you give the smaller triangle I addressed a week ago or so?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ”e” terminal 2853 cash index

      Delete
    2. @Erik..see my post at 11:19 am, below. The smaller triangle has lower odds due to having very poor proportions. The count below has much better proportioned waves, and ones I can understand.

      Delete
  8. ED count posted yesterday doesn't work now with 5 longer than 3 in time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's still possible to count the impluse with 3 at yesterday's high and 4 as a triangle up to last night's action.

      Delete
    2. I tend to agree with that assessment. If price were to get below 2,966 then it would "turn a degree" from what I can see, and the only way to 'rescue it' to make a new local higher high would be with a triangle.

      Delete
  9. fyi - As it is, the ES hourly has a divergent high with the MACD and RSI at this point.

    ReplyDelete
  10. a of B of larger B or 2 on gold.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is in recognition that "in Ralph's day..." he would have only had hourly closes. As far as I can tell, the channels may be instructive, and the count does not break any rules I can see.

    https://invst.ly/c34o7

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  12. First, I was glad to see that others picked up on the Y to 1 (5 waves) vs the "b" to "c" (3 waves) issue.

    Here's my bigger concern. The fact that this same move down was being considered as an either or (5 waves vs 3 waves) implies that we dont know which it is (if we did, one scenario would be eliminated). So, I think a fair question would be:

    Why is it that a month later we still dont know whether the early Aug selloff was 5 waves or 3 waves?

    (Its one thing to be unsure before the move is completed, its quite another to be unsure after the fact.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's just that no one wants to believe me. Expanding Leading Diagonal and "deep retrace"? To be re-published tonight.

      https://invst.ly/c35of

      TJ

      Delete
    2. ..and you can see that "if you want to force it" that you 'could' call a leading diagonal over & done with where the 'a' wave of minute ((v)) is, as a 'smaller' minute ((a)) wave, and then, you could have b of the present minute ((v)) as minute ((b)), and then everything that follows downward as minute ((c)). The problem with that scenario is that this new minute ((b)) would not break the upper diagonal trend line of a minute ((a)), minute ((b)), minute ((c)) scenario.

      So, the view I showed you is my preferred count. This is just one man's view (aided, of course, by the Elliott Wave Oscillator), and recognizing that the odds of being correct/incorrect at this point are still 50:50 without a lower low.

      Delete
    3. Actually I think I posted before how iv doesn't overlap i in the LD count.

      In regards to whether it not it's 3 waves or 5, due to the nature of truncations sometimes it's not clear, especially for violent moves. Personally that's where I check other large cap stocks or indexes to see if there were impluses there.

      Delete
    4. @C .. in the first case, The Elliott Wave Principle says, "almost always" overlaps. It does not say a simple, "always". Wish that it would. In the second case, I think there are two arguments around it. The first is simple: just move wave ((i)), one peak to the right. There is still enough of wave ((iii) to do it, although one might not like the timing. The second argument is this: everything until the first trading day in August is part of a prior truncation high. Then 'a' of ((v)) is i, and overnight futures low is v. One must hold one's nose and pick one's poison for the downward count. So, odds remain 50:50 until there is a lower low; how many times do I need to say it?

      Delete
    5. ET - Its not a matter of whether anyone wants to believe you (I dont believe:o)). If the move objectively counts as 5 waves, then its 5. If its 3 waves, then 3. There should only be one way (otherwise there's a big issue with EW itself!).

      Please understand my issue isnt with you, but rather the counting process itself. If there is no objective way to be sure, then what's the point. If there is an objective way to be sure, then which was it, 5 waves or 3 waves?

      And if this can be answered, then no need for the two differing scenarios, agreed?

      I would think others would have the same question(s).
      Again, no reflection on you, but rather the process.

      Delete
    6. Nothing is 100% objective; nothing is completely black-and-white. Nothing in life; nothing in wave counting. The indicators like the EWO 'help' with objectivity. They simply 'can not' eliminate the fact that, at the quantum level, nature is probabilistic, uncertain, and not fully deterministic. In short, the future is not 'pre-ordained'. If these concepts are not familiar to you - as they are to most scientists - then your view of the world is eclipsed by lack of knowledge. If your world view does not include 'probability' as in "games of chance", as it does for most mathematicians, then perhaps your understanding of financial markets is limited by that lack of knowledge. But, the fact of 'probability' does not in any way lessen mathematicians from having a viable principle of operations. All solutions to quantum equations result in only a "probability" that an electron is here, or that is there, "until it is observed." Nothing I can do about it. No one gave me the powers to re-write the laws of nature.

      Delete
    7. I wonder if wave counts are like observer effect. Maybe we shouldn't count them publicly, lol.

      Delete
    8. Precisely why I take exception to some EW analysts talking nonsense about EW being "predictive". It is particularly ironic since these same individuals display a miserable track record in accurately calling market direction. I am surprised at how many posters are ignoring the fact that 1,2,3, is potentially the same as A,B,C, until PROVEN otherwise. The criticism of Joe is beyond infantile!

      Delete
    9. Seconding Joe's point with less eloquence. Post pattern behavior confirms a count. The shape and measurements of the count in question are the first step, but it takes post pattern to confirm. You can't "know" until the pattern continues or is invalidated.

      Imagine if the move off the ATH was a perfect elliott impulse rather than a proposed expanding diagonal. But then the market chops around and then makes a new high before a new low. Was the impulse actually a complex :3 that can only be found on smaller timeframes? Or was it an A followed by a truncated C?

      Delete
    10. '1,2,3, is potentially the same as A,B,C, until PROVEN otherwise' from the '8 fold method' post was the first "aha" moment for me that led to me ditching paid Elliott services and sticking to this site for my EW education

      Delete
    11. @C: :{ I'm coming to the same conclusion - not for physics reasons but because it is well known that there are 'financial bots' that scour the web looking for peoples financial opinions. Such tools exist already, as below.

      https://www.promptcloud.com/scraping-webpage-for-sentiment-analysis/

      I kid you not.
      TJ

      Delete
  13. On a positive note, your wave 3 of 3 shows nicely on the EW osc.! (30 minute) So we must be in wave 4 and wave 5 will end probably around close of trading to print the weekly price.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Wow. A bit of critical thinking can be a dangerous thing apparently. lol

    Once again, my comments DO NOT take issue with Joe!!! Elliott Wave is based upon 5 wave and 3 wave moves, and knowing the difference (at least that's my understanding).

    So, if one is to apply EW, seems logical one needs a way to tell one from the other.
    Simple observation. I understand that an ABC can be a 1,2,3. But those are only 3 waves. Its differentiating between 5 and 3 thats at issue here. Sorry to stir up everyone's protective juices. I just thought it a fair assumption that after the fact, one can determine (with a high degree of certainty) the difference between a 5 and 3 wave structure utilizing EW. Perhaps that's an incorrect assumption.

    While never sorry to question, I am sorry they are not taken in the spirit they are posed. Best to leave it at that it appears.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Eight Fold Path Method helps to do that by looking for fourth waves that meet specific criteria (see the Featured Post on the web-site if unfamiliar). This is good discussion, and not to be reacted to negatively.

      Delete
  15. S&P500 cash index 15-min; well within 90% of the high; usual drill - flat, barrier triangle or next impulse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just showing the 90% level, and again, that rules don't have to be broken for correct counts. It would be "three waves down, and three waves up", so far.

      https://invst.ly/c3buc

      Can go higher if it wants,
      TJ

      Delete
  16. Replies
    1. BBR, nice job counting gold in real time. Keep it up. Thanks.

      Delete
    2. Thanks, thinking they park it here so u dont know if this is b or next wave down.

      Delete
    3. My guess is that this is b. "a" up looks like a 5, so we probably get c up on Monday to complete B or 2.

      Delete
  17. Joe, it looks like your possible triangle will continue making a 1 and 2 of wave 3 dwn inside your wave 2 before crashing dwn fast starting in and around October 6. Very Nice call again. I really enjoyed your weekend video which was very easy to follow. It looks like Btc will do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  18. possible contracting diagonal from this morning's low?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Here's the potential flat again

    https://invst.ly/c3e6u

    TJ

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

    ReplyDelete