 |
| S&P500 Cash Index - 4 Hr - Max Length for i |
So, to avoid confusion, if mi = minute one, and (i) = minuet one, and i = sub-minuette one, then the maximum length for i is about 2,587. This is because as a smaller degree wave, sub-minuette wave i may not become longer than the previous larger degree wave - which is minuet (i) in this case.
However, a new minuet wave (i), down, of minute ((iii)) can become as long as mi. That is because in relationship to minuet (i), of the new minute three wave, then minute one - or mi above - is the previous larger degree wave. This is the way a minute-three grows to become a larger wave.
I hope this is not too confusing. Please take some time to look it over and clarify it for yourself. I still have to review it, almost every day to try not to make a mistake.
Have a good start to the weekend.
TraderJoe
the i has more bars than (i). so don't we need to be in iii already? also, why is the prior largest degree of a first wave the first wave of the prior completed wave but the prior largest completed wave of a third wave is the entire completed first wave and not related to just the third wave of the prior comp li eyed wave?
ReplyDeleteYes. When you add time into the equation, we should be in iii. (I was showing max price length only).
DeleteWe are 'most likely' in minuet (iii), down, now.
DeleteJoe, the thing that is confusing me the most is that in posts dated 11-15,11-16,11-20 you are showing a minuette (i) on the charts ranging from 2712 to 2686. I realize there can be a few points difference because some are cash and some are futures. In posts dated 11-22 and today 11-23 there is no minuette (i) on the charts. While I understand the principal this difference alters the math. I have been showing on my charts that 2686 was minuette (i) down, 2747 as minuette(ii) up and now in minutte(iii) down. If I am incorrect in this please correct me.
ReplyDeleteYes. Still valid. I was showing 'max' lenghth only in price.
DeleteYes, we are 'most likely' in minuet (iii), down, now.
DeleteHi Joe,
ReplyDeleteDo you mean that both degrees mentioned above has to stay intact? Or if ((iii)) wants to grow into a larger wave we "shift up" one degree and therefore can ignore the degree rule you mentioned first of sub-minuette (i) being shorter than minuet (i) of ((i))?
DJI made it's potential minute ((ii)) almost to the 78,6. Because of that the sub-minuette (i) is now the same price lenght as minuet (i) of minute ((i)) and also bigger in time. Depending on your answer to the first question I don't now the implications of this yet.
Yes, if an impulse forms both degrees must remain in tact. That means we are 'most likely' in minuet (iii), down, now.
DeleteThanks, that helped clear things up alot, and wow what a powerfull tool! It’s interesting that the alternate is the totaly opposite of the bear count (in the short term), maybe the market itself hasn’t decided yet...
DeleteFirst post here even if I follow this blog since a year or so.
ReplyDeleteAnd I take the opportunity raised by this question.
Even if it is clear that the concept of sub-"something" implies that it should be smaller than "something", there is a sort of predestination that sounds strange.
In this comment
https://studyofcycles.blogspot.com/2018/11/diagonal-degrees-and-avoidance-of.html?showComment=1541969408715#c143718613057125024
it seems that you imply that once a 1st wave is "created", then all that follows is predestined and cannot violate a maximum wave length.
As said, that sounds strange.
Even with, as Erik asks, continous "shift-ups" it seems to me that the problem doesn't change, because we always have to cope with a sub-wave (sum of lot of shift-ups) that anyway violates the rule of being smaller than the one-greater-degree wave.
No. There is nothing in the wave structure that is predestined. That is because there is an 'alternate' as you read in previous posts of a larger B wave flat - if it can get down to the 90% level. See the "For Flatlanders and Double Ziggers" post. So, it 'could' impulse. But doesn't have to. It could form a Flat, instead. But, if it 'does' impulse, then degree structure 'must' be followed.
DeleteBack from several weeks of vacation and catching up as usual nice work Joe. I'm learning a lot. Much more complex than I originally thought but very logical. Thanks
ReplyDeleteWelcome back ski..
DeleteCan mi itself become longer than (i). Will that be degree violation ?
ReplyDeletemi (or minute-i) or ((i)) is the longer minute wave of which minuet (i) is a component wave. Since (i) is shorter than mi or ((i)), there is no degree violation. Minute-i, mi, or ((i)) is already completed.
DeleteThere is now a pretty clean 5-wave impulse up from the Nov 22 low on SPX on the 5-min chart. It may have a wave or two at the top, but there is good alternation with a FLAT for it's second wave, and a multiple zigzag for it's fourth wave.
ReplyDeleteJoes, since markets were closed 11/22, do you mean 11/23?
DeleteYes, sorry. Typo. 11/23 was the low.
Delete