Ok, you missed W-X-Y could also be a 3-3-5, with Y triangle
Technically speaking, in an A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.
A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))
and hence can still be considered as an A-B-C —just nomenclature.
No mate, not "just nomenclature", this is crucial. A wave
C can't be in 3, only Y (as 2nd impulse of a structure) can be in 3, at the same way as 1/3/5 waves can't be in 3.
W/X/Y = a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c OR a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c-d-e OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c-d-e. That's all.
A/B/C = a-b-c/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/w-x-y/1-2-3-4-5. Final 1-2-3-4-5 can be changed with a-b-c-d-e. That's all.
Did you read in the book a C wave can be in a-b-c?
Thus far, it appears the correction from JAN-2021 to MAR-2022 is 3-3-3 structure;
I mean this
https://ibb.co/1ZzG3M4You see this part as a 3-3-3, waves here can be named only w-x-y (double three). Unless you can find a way of counting a 3-3-5, than it would be ok for an a-b-c (also w-x-y, if y triangle).
Assuming this part is a 3-3-3=w-x-y (= A only,
not W), after a following B we need a 5 wave pattern. But the second impulse 20 Oct '21 to 24 Jan '22 is counted in 3. There is something wrong here.
Consider the following timescales...
PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(2) pullback was 261 days.
PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback was 285 days (if now complete).
PRIMARY[4] pullback was 364 days.
Would not expect PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback to last longer than PRIMARY[4] pullback, and so ought to complete by mid-April 2022; and hence would not expect an ongoing sideways correction.
Previously you said:
The Elliott Wave model and projections are indicative of price & structure, not time.
Indeed we don't have fixed laws for the time variable (e.g. "a 3 wave can't be the smallest" is a fixed law), time is quite an "accomodating" concept in the theory. Being 2 an 4 equal in time is not eligible to be a good sign of correct labelling, in my opinion.
See page 230, 217 (II and IV of (III))...
However I think there is something, probably related to the "right look" concept. But that's another story.
Thanks for your efforts and sharing your interpretation
See sections 5.2 and 5.3 of the following:
https://phantran.net/elliott-wave-theory-ewt/The sideways move from APR-2021 to JAN-2022 is simply considered as a W-X-Y (a 3-3-3 Flat structure), called a Double. It does not require to be followed by another combinatory structure (i.e. making it a Triple), or be followed by a Triangle.
In regard to a A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.
A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))
If the latter option of C unfolds, then the structure may be considered as W-X-Y instead. This is commonly unknown, and usually occurs in commodity and forex markets. Can't recall where this was exactly discussed, but following reference may assist...
R.N. Elliott's Masterworks: The Definitive Collection https://www.elliottwave.com/Book/RN-Elliotts-Masterworks
In regard to your illustration (i.e.
https://ibb.co/1ZzG3M4): The entire structure; i.e. a short wave-A, an irregular wave-B, and long wave-C, is known as an Elongated Flat (see
https://blog.hycmlab.com/elliott-waves-other-flat-patterns/). In regard to metrics, the relationship is a perfect (C = A * 2.618) Fibonacci extension:
https://i.ibb.co/LPXXBzy/elongatedflat.pngIn regard to the projections provided and speculated upon, indeed the illustrations portray structure and not time. Would not expect a lower degree correction to elapse longer in time than a higher degree correction. Hence would expect the sideways Flat correction from APR-2021 to JAN-2022 to have already completed, unless of course another scenario is underway.