Critical Levels - EW analysis - page 46.

HeliKopterBen

hero member

Activity: 622

Merit: 500

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 16, 2015, 08:22:36 PM

I'm giving an 85% chance we see double digits in this bear market. Bold, I know, but it just doesn't look good for any bullish scenario to develop in the near to mid term.

You might as well make it an even 90% Grin

. I would give about a 20% chance of double digits in this bear market but about a 70% chance of lower prices from here. It's hard to say that a market will drop 56.5% from current prices when the current price is already down 80%, even with bitcoin. I believe there is a decent chance that 200-210 support holds and prices rise from here back to ATH. I won't be surprised if it happens.

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 16, 2015, 08:51:01 PM

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 16, 2015, 08:22:36 PM

I would have to say they are all fairly equally doomy
I'm giving an 85% chance we see double digits in this bear market. Bold, I know, but it just doesn't look good for any bullish scenario to develop in the near to mid term.

chessnut does make a good point about running flats in ii of 3's but it just doesn't look right. B isn't supposed to be more than 200% of A but in Bitcoin, I have noticed what is typical in larger markets isn't always what is typical here. So I won't discount that count based on that.

Damn ... need to recalibrate my abacus - it's only giving a 77% chance of double digits Tongue

I'll admit, that number is a bit arbitrary but based on how many possible counts there are and how many, when projected out using fibo, hit 100 or lower, there is a very good chance it will. These projections do not take into account any excessive panic either, so projections hitting ~110 could also see <$100. So yes, "85%" is my opinion and not based on maths.

Quote from: btc4lifer on April 16, 2015, 08:56:36 PM

Quote from: chessnut on April 16, 2015, 07:39:23 PM

img snipped...

@chessnut can you please explain how the ABC conbination in your chart is able to be a flat and have a largish volume event happen for the B.

Isn't the point of a flat that A only has three waves due to lack of follow through in the market and that B is a correction of nearly 100% of A?

I'm not trying to troll at all, just trying to learn and understand EW.

Actually, that B is >200% of A, but I'm just Blahblling Wink

btc4lifer

newbie

Activity: 57

Merit: 0

Quote from: chessnut on April 16, 2015, 07:39:23 PM

@chessnut can you please explain how the ABC conbination in your chart is able to be a flat and have a largish volume event happen for the B.

Isn't the point of a flat that A only has three waves due to lack of follow through in the market and that B is a correction of nearly 100% of A?

I'm not trying to troll at all, just trying to learn and understand EW.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 16, 2015, 08:22:36 PM

I would have to say they are all fairly equally doomy
I'm giving an 85% chance we see double digits in this bear market. Bold, I know, but it just doesn't look good for any bullish scenario to develop in the near to mid term.

chessnut does make a good point about running flats in ii of 3's but it just doesn't look right. B isn't supposed to be more than 200% of A but in Bitcoin, I have noticed what is typical in larger markets isn't always what is typical here. So I won't discount that count based on that.

Damn ... need to recalibrate my abacus - it's only giving a 77% chance of double digits Tongue

Xiaoxiao

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1000

The Golden Rule Rules

So it looks like this will break 230 at least and maybe test 240-260 before another down swing?

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 16, 2015, 07:44:05 PM

Quote from: chessnut on April 16, 2015, 07:39:23 PM

Ryan has put it well but there is one more count I see possible, DanV is counting this one too.

It's a heavy running flat, not unexpected in case of ii of III

Hmmm ... now that's the count I could not see - one that would allow the move from the low to be an impulse and a C.
I could not find an proprotionate A and B.
Thanks Chessnut

That's a pretty bearish count, right ?

EDIT : If you don't mind could you rank these 3 options in terms of 'bearishness'
I have some ideas, but I am sure you know better

Another Edit : For Dan's count, the A looks a bit small, no?

I would have to say they are all fairly equally doomy
I'm giving an 85% chance we see double digits in this bear market. Bold, I know, but it just doesn't look good for any bullish scenario to develop in the near to mid term.

chessnut does make a good point about running flats in ii of 3's but it just doesn't look right. B isn't supposed to be more than 200% of A but in Bitcoin, I have noticed what is typical in larger markets isn't always what is typical here. So I won't discount that count based on that.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Quote from: chessnut on April 16, 2015, 07:39:23 PM

Ryan has put it well but there is one more count I see possible, DanV is counting this one too.

It's a heavy running flat, not unexpected in case of ii of III

Hmmm ... now that's the count I could not see - one that would allow the move from the low to be an impulse and a C.
I could not find an proprotionate A and B.
Thanks Chessnut

That's a pretty bearish count, right ?

EDIT : If you don't mind could you rank these 3 options in terms of 'bearishness'
I have some ideas, but I am sure you know better

Another Edit : For Dan's count, the A looks a bit small, no?

chessnut

legendary

Activity: 924

Merit: 1001

Ryan has put it well but there is one more count I see possible, DanV is counting this one too.

It's a heavy running flat, not unexpected in case of ii of III

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: BldSwtTrs on April 16, 2015, 05:53:43 PM

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 16, 2015, 04:36:26 PM

It does look more like an impulse now.

What are you paying attention for in order to say what looks like an impulse and what not?

5 waves that follow the three strict rules of EW.
Wave-2 never retraces more than 100% of wave-1
Wave-3 is never the shortest
Wave-4 never enters the price territory of wave-1

Some other things to look a are the time spent in the corrections for waves 2 and 4. These are proportional to each other in this case, so it is a valid impulse.

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: JustAnotherSheep on April 16, 2015, 05:49:04 PM

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 16, 2015, 04:36:26 PM

It does look more like an impulse now. I had two likely counts and it seems like the red one below may be the one to watch. Impulse is still valid in the bear case. A wave-A can be 5 waves. Invalidation of the yellow count occurs at either 232.38 or 233.90 depending on what you believe to be the end of wave-i of 1 of (3) of III. And invalidation of red is at 253.05, a long way away. Target for red is not updated to reflect the shallower than expected A, so the target shown is a little high. Might get ~236 which would invalidate the yellow and make this bear happy Cheesy

Noob question: How come the yellow and red counts are invalidated at the end of wave i and 1 respectively, and not the top of 1 and (1)? I thought Wave 2 corrections could maximally retrace the entirety of the preceding wave. Or have I missed some guideline/rule?

You didn't miss anything. Embarrassed

I was tired and mistyped (mis-thought?). You are correct. These are both wave-2 scenarios so are invalidated at the beginning of the respective wave-1's. I think it was that weak red 4 that I was talking about last night with some people that had me discombobulated for a minute thinking about invalidation by overlap. I will correct my previous post now.

BldSwtTrs

legendary

Activity: 861

Merit: 1010

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 16, 2015, 04:36:26 PM

It does look more like an impulse now.

What are you paying attention for in order to say what looks like an impulse and what not?

JustAnotherSheep

full member

Activity: 239

Merit: 100

Quote from: RyNinDaCleM on April 16, 2015, 04:36:26 PM

It does look more like an impulse now. I had two likely counts and it seems like the red one below may be the one to watch. Impulse is still valid in the bear case. A wave-A can be 5 waves. Invalidation of the yellow count occurs at either 232.38 or 233.90 depending on what you believe to be the end of wave-i of 1 of (3) of III. And invalidation of red is at 253.05, a long way away. Target for red is not updated to reflect the shallower than expected A, so the target shown is a little high. Might get ~236 which would invalidate the yellow and make this bear happy Cheesy

Noob question: How come the yellow and red counts are invalidated at the end of wave i and 1 respectively, and not the top of 1 and (1)? I thought Wave 2 corrections could maximally retrace the entirety of the preceding wave. Or have I missed some guideline/rule?

Tzupy

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1094

I agree with Ryan's scenarios, my favorite one is going up to ~240$ and starting the crash from there.
Since the rise to 262$ was sort of compressed, the descent was also lower amplitude than I expected.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Thanks for the confirmation Ryan. Your red count is what I was referring too. But you do it so much better Kiss

RyNinDaCleM

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1009

Legen -wait for it- dary

Quote from: phoenix1 on April 16, 2015, 01:34:05 PM

Yes, Wave C of an A-B-C would take the form of 5 waves (I believe that is a firm rule).
But to me the proportions seem very stretched for that count. I think that would make the consolidation at $226 wave iv of C, and it looks too long timewise Undecided

Looks to me more like wave A of a larger zig-zag (5-3-5) correction

It does look more like an impulse now. I had two likely counts and it seems like the red one below may be the one to watch. Impulse is still valid in the bear case. A wave-A can be 5 waves. Invalidation of the yellow count occurs at 240.58. And invalidation of red is at 262.45, a long way away. Target for red is not updated to reflect the shallower than expected A, so the target shown is a little high. Might get ~236 which would ~~invalidate the yellow and~~ make this bear happy Cheesy

Edited the invalidations in bold

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

Yes, Wave C of an A-B-C would take the form of 5 waves (I believe that is a firm rule).
But to me the proportions seem very stretched for that count. I think that would make the consolidation at $226 wave iv of C, and it looks too long timewise Undecided

Looks to me ~~more~~ possibly like wave A of a larger zig-zag (5-3-5) correction
(edited to reflect my relative lack of knowledge)

damiano

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1000

103 days, 21 hours and 10 minutes.

Quote from: sickLifeObv on April 16, 2015, 01:11:43 PM

I think we could be in wave C of the ABC retracement after the previous dump. In a corrective wave, subwave C can be a 5-wave pattern (of which 1-3-5 are impulses). So this does non invalidate the count!
Correct me if I am wrong, I am kinda newbie in EW.

If that's so then this would be the last wave of impulse which would lead to the drop

sickLifeObv

newbie

Activity: 40

Merit: 0

I think we could be in wave C of the ABC retracement after the previous dump. In a corrective wave, subwave C can be a 5-wave pattern (of which 1-3-5 are impulses). So this does non invalidate the count!
Correct me if I am wrong, I am kinda newbie in EW.

phoenix1

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

What do you make of this latest move, Chessnut and Ryan ?
We were due a retracement for the bear case, but this look like an impulse Undecided

coinableS

legendary

Activity: 1442

Merit: 1186

Just wanted to stop in and congratulate Chessnut on is EW analysis from a few days ago. Spot on, bravo! Even as a bull I still must acknowledge your accuracy Wink

Keep it up!

Topic: Critical Levels - EW analysis - page 46. (Read 355104 times)