Topic: It's called a correction (waveaddict's bitcoin charting subscription thread) - page 12. (Read 92097 times)

Remember, if the secondary target is breached, you should be looking at both the orange/red count along with the classic purple count from chart (138) for likely scenarios

correct, the channel is broken. Remember the secondary target though to solidify the trend change

Soooo....

this latest dip seals the deal no ?

Just saw the April 6 update. Here's a question I'm trying to find the answer to (I'm sure it's buried in the forums somewhere, but I'm currently coming up with no hits): how long is the MtGox half price commission sale going to last? Seems like something they should just list on the main MtGox page, but I don't see it.

-April 5 update sent 
(includes chart: 149)

-April 4 update sent  
(includes chart: 148)

I forgot to attach the chart in the first email, so I just sent another one with the file attached. In all, there should be two separate emails that you will get shortly if you haven't got them already.

At what time?

I was talking about the price.
It was nowhere near $4 at the time so i couldn't have bought in.

-April 3 update sent 
(includes chart: 146, 147)

I forgot to post here yesterday even though I sent an email out:
-April 2 update
(includes chart: 144)

This was the last public prediction in mid February as stated in the opening post of this thread:

Here is what was predicted:
http://imageshack.us/f/217/bitcoinforumiii.png/  --> I specifically stated that red was more likely within the chart.

Here is what happened:
http://imageshack.us/f/715/145f.png/

You can ignore the waves all you want, but they are there. I am inevitably going to be wrong at times about which plausible wave count succeeds because this is a game of probabilities, but when you nail the correct count or invalidate impossible counts in time, there is no other predictive analysis that can make you more money or prevent you from losing a great deal of money in the long run. It is one of the few analytical tools that is not reactive but proactive in helping you gauge where the price can and cannot go.

It's called adapting. Do you have any idea how many different paths we could have taken to get to that target zone of $4. I merely pointed one out (which I saw as most likely at the time) that ended up being pretty close to what actually materialized. Remember, I did not start the subscription service until after the second image. Obviously, if I was actively charting bitcoin daily and posting free charts throughout that period, I would have re-drew the trend-lines to fit the 'obvious triangle before the plunge to $4. You can always say that I was not perfectly accurate here, but honestly what would you have done or thought at the time that I posted the first image? You were probably just as bullish as the majority of people around $6 before we fell to $4.

Go right ahead and try to trade bitcoin without me. Do you really think that you know more than I do about technical analysis and its predictive power along with its limits? This is not an exact science; we are not working with precision here...merely probabilities and experience.

Regarding your point about heading straight up from the $4 bottom and how I was wrong: This is the longest period of time that bitcoin has traded sideways. There is no precedent (the very heart of technical analysis) for this kind of action from looking at past data. Therefore, no sane analyst/trader would have called a continuation of a sideways movement at that time knowing how volatile bitcoin's past has been.

oh really

What? no!
I never said that.
It's only your imagination (or unstated pre-requisite of sorts?).

What i was talking about is that your predictions are completely inacurate in both those graphs.
And of course you didn't address this in your answer.

Your first chart clearly predicts that in the first half of february the price would drop to about $3.5, then boom up to 7.5
Neither pricepoint was hit in the first half of february.
The price moved some time later but that doesn't correlate with the channels you drew.
So no relation to the channels and the price drop around feb. 13th.
Meanwhile the drop had many more waves then you predicted.
How is that even possible if wave 'theory' supposedly has predictive capabilities?

Then your second graph also predicts a rally that fails to materialize.

Now i can see that channels exist as indicators of trend.
But all this business with counting waves is fantasy IMHO.

You would have bought in at $4, so how would you have lost? 

Looking at this in hindsight i don't see the slightlest correlation in the predicted part of your graphs and reality...
It seems you twice predict a strong rally which failed to materialize for almost 2 months.
Furthermore, if one cares enough to study the data in detail one can notice that there are many channels to chose from and the question is why you chose the ones that faild to correctly predict behaviour?

If i were to go along with these predictions i would have lost.
So why would any sane person want this kind of advice?

very lively atmosphere in chat right now if any subscribers would like to join

-April 1 update sent  
(includes chart: 139)

'premium only' email sent

Whichever subscriber of mine is using a hushmail account, I need you to delete some of the emails in your account to make room for more. Your account is full at the moment and hushmail keeps sending your emails back to me.

-March 31 update sent   
(includes chart: 137, 138)

I'll be in the chat room in about 2 hours or so.

I'm over in Otoh's chat room right now for anyone interested. Just follow his instructions to get signed in.

EDIT: I went ahead and just sent an email with the password to current subscribers.