After opening lower, the NQ futures made a marginal new daily high, and settled higher. The Russell 2000 futures made a new daily low and settled lower. The Dow and the ES made neither a new daily high nor low. The Dow closed lower, and the ES closed higher.
The count remains the same as minute ((w)), ((x)), ((y)) to a Minor B wave, shown on the NASDAQ 100 futures, below, with minute ((y)) now slightly exceeding 0.618 x minute ((w)) - which represents very good proportion.
 |
| NQ Futures - Daily - Double Zigzag |
Have a good start to the week.
TraderJoe
An all time high as well.
ReplyDeleteHere is an alternate count on the 15 minute futures - https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4yPqqTW4AAnp41.jpg:large
ReplyDeletes&p futures 15 minutes updated - https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D4zFSU5W0AAseWx.jpg:large
ReplyDeleteSorry to be off topic, but since in this blog Glenn Neely and his "Mastering Elliott Wave" is often cited I try to ask a question about what Neely wrote at page 3-45
ReplyDeleteMaybe I don't understand it because English is not my mother language and so I am losing some hidden meaning.
I am trying to translate into an Excel spreadsheet all his "rules of logic" and that's a tough job (I begin to fear that it is also useless...)
I am wondering why he didn't put them down as formulas or as pictures/charts like he does throughout the book.
I read lots of words and obscure concepts, if he had had clear ideas he would have explained better.
Neely gives me the impression of a guy that had some good ideas and some other ideas the he wasn't able to express.
For example, from the technical side he even created a rule (Rule 3) when "m2 is exactly 61.8% of m1"... now how can you expect that a wave (a monowave) is EXACTLY 61.8% of another wave? exactly to the tenth? exactly to the hundredth? how can it be?
And that makes me think that he wanted to theorize but he lacked an engineering vision of what he was talking about.
It seems to me that Neely, once he wrote his MEW stopped there and since then he didn't develop or explain better EW Theory. Sure, he developed his NEoWave theory and added patterns and rules to avoid (like Joe does here) the effort to make Elliot Wave Original theory to work.
Now my request, if Joe has time (and will) to clarify it, I am referring to the phrase "If the end of m3 is exceeded before the end of m0" at Rule 4b - condition b - category i (third line before the end of page 3-45 of MEW).
How can the end of m3 (which is up) be exceeded "before the end" of m0 (which is down)?
Could someone post a chart?
The same concept is in the following page (3-46) "if the end of m1 is exceeded during the formation of m2".
Thanks in advance and no problem if I don't get a reply.
My conclusion on neowaves:
DeleteIf the author of the theory says that with his system the wave since the minimum of December 2018 is impossible to structurally
decipher.
If the author of the theory needs a alternate trading system (neely river), because with the waves counting he was loosing money.
Surely these "scientific" rules are just guidelines that sometimes runs and sometimes not. A puzzle to go to nowhere.
Thanks
DeleteAll gaps closed in the upside (spx cash)
ReplyDeleteBasis NQ1!, it looks like (c) of your circle Y comes in around 7860 where (a)=(c).
ReplyDeleteThis is as impulsive as I’ve seen the market in months. Great day for bulls.
ReplyDelete