As far as I can tell the rainbow model hasn't failed yet, as it factors in the regression from the lows as opposed to the highs. It's only left this model to the upside as opposed to the downside basically.
And here you go again, defending a chart that was created as a joke.
I doubt it was created as a joke. Care to reference that? I'd be curious to see
the creator's reasoning for that.
Look at it, look at the lines, see the lines outside the chart, it means it has failed.
Yes I see them, the upper band was badly aligned that much is certain. I can see how a more regressive upper band could easily connect the three peaks, which would factor in reduced volatility as well. Even with two peaks that most recent peak could have been much better anticipated. Given that was created in late 2014 though, and price exceeded the upper band in late 2013, it didn't fail anyone...
But this isn't relevant to the lower band that's still in tact (and what I'm referring to).
If my mechanic tells me that my bike will blow at 10k RPM and I'm doing trip after trip pushing it to 14k, it means I have to change my mechanic not my bike.
Strange analogy but I'll roll with it, as you could otherwise just change your mindset and not take everything so simplistically from a so-called expert. If your mechanic says your bike
will blow @ X, what they really mean is it
can blow @ X, as it's unlikely they definitively know what would happen. They probably have a duty to warn you about the potential risk of doing so as well, as could be very dangerous to push a bike beyond it's limits. Imagine if they didn't warn you? How would they feel if you ended up in hospital over it? Maybe they just want to sell you a more expensive bike. But really, the mechanic oversimplified the situation. Did he say it will blow
immediately? Of course not. Would you be damaging your bike if it's only guaranteeing 10k RPM? It's possible.
Should you take this one mechanics opinion as truth? Of course not. You could take a second opinion, someone else with more experience might tell you it'll be fine, but would wear your bike out sooner. Then you can make a better informed decision on whether you want to take the risk of wearing out your bike much quicker (if that is indeed the case), or get a bike that can guarantee 14k RPM.
I have no idea what this has to do with Bitcoin's rainbow chart though
it's just a drawing, if everything in the world could be predicted as such we wouldn't have "speculation".
I think you'll find your first line invalidates your second. As you said the model could fail tomorrow, so surely it's still speculation to be relying on this model when it could still fail ?
I don't see how you could have come to that conclusion
1) In the first line I'm telling you the chart was a joke and obviously it will fail
2) In the second line I'm telling you that if somebody would find a way to perfectly predict the price there will be no more speculation as we would know for sure
How is that contradiction?
Probably because
so far this chart has accurately predicted the bottoms (since it's creation), but it obviously doesn't mean it will continue to do so; hence it's always been speculative. Any model, despite how accurate it's been over the years or decades, can always fail at any time. Predictions, by definition, are never guarantees, so it'd still be speculation despite it's accuracy.
In summary, the contradiction comes from fundamentally not recognising that correct predictions are still based on speculation.