Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 150. (Read 647176 times)

Beast, as Armstrong says, just follow the numbers. You don't need ANYTHING else. If a Reversal is elected, it should test the next one. He adds commentary and such but that does not mean the commentary is a trade signal. When prices close above or below the point is he gives, that is the trade signal. I already mentioned, multiple times, how Armstrong clearly called this October crash near the end of September and the closes required to enter the trade. Reversals are black and white. There is no ambiguity involved. Arrays are different but you don't need them and Armstrong is hit or miss with those anyway. Follow the numbers and you make money. I really dont get what is so hard about that particular. Reversals can be measured objectively. I already posted the max P/L  structure of what would happen if one followed his call this October.

The Dow for Week of 09/24/18
By: Marty ArmstrongMonday, September 24, 2018



We did not OPEN above last week's high so we may move into a low next week to retest support. This is what we mean that the consolidation is not yet over. The Breakout Channel on the Weekly level stood at 26692.21 on the bottom and the market reached intraday 26769.16. It did close slight into the channel, but that was not yet enough to signal the breakout.






On the daily level, we are trading within the Breakout Channel but have not pushed through the top. This allows plenty of room to retest the bottom-side of the channel.

We have a Daily Bearish at 26067 and a closing below that will signal a retest of support. The first Weekly Bearish lies at 25877 so this is where key support begins. AT the end of this week we also have the month-end closing. The Monthly bearish do not begin until below 24000.

One of the curiosities of the market behavior relative to our Reversals has been how critical reversals once elected reverse direction and become critical support. We have stood by and watched the 1362 level in gold stand on a monthly closing basis and 1341 on a quarterly closing come hell or high water. Now the 25800 in the Dow may be critical in general as support. If we tend to retest that area yet hold into year-end, then we could be creating a platform for a Vertical Market. That is not yet confirmed. Just keep this in mind and observing the remainder of the year.\

For month end close this Friday, we see support moving into October forming at the 25500-25000 level. Closing resistance will stand 26620. A closing ABOVE that may signal a rally into November.

Keep in mind that while we have craziness going on in Washington with the Deep State Coup slowly becoming exposed, the insanity in Europe is not to be ignored. We also have the Democrats in the USA secretly advocating war against Russia behind the curtain as retribution for Hillary's emails. Keep in mind this is very much like being blamed for coming home early to catch a thief in your home and then he blames you for returning early.

Today, we have support at the 26315 level and we are trading at 26584 at the time of this post. A close below 26519 today will warn of a further decline tomorrow is possible. The key target in time this week  is split Wed/Thurs and this is followed by Monday Oct 1st with a Panic Cycle the next day.

Once again, the failure to open above last week's high signals a retest of support is likely.

I think this is more of a longer term comment as he says, "we could even see this develop as a soon as December". I think what he is saying here is that there is not a complete meltdown but just a correction which does not mean there will be a new high tomorrow. The weekly array and the elected reversal still point to a low for this week and tomorrow is the ideal turning point. I don´t think he is trying to explain away position, he is trying to point out that there is no sign of a complete meltdown and that we are still in a staging or consolidation phase.

I do agree that he is not clear and i am always going back to re-read his comments to figure out what the hell he means.

I have the same queries as you based on the time frame of the rallies in a bear market..hindsight will help us test our hypothesis...

I also asked Erwin about Socrates reversal numbers.. I asked are the reversals quoted the 'Major' ones or just the 'next in line' - and he confirmed the written Reversals on the Investor level are the 'next in line'.
Yes it makes it harder when you don't have all the Reversals to hand to see gaps etc, but once the Trader Level comes live, he confirmed that you will be able to subscribe to just one instrument if you wish (i.e. Gold Futures) and get the all the reversals and arrays for just that.  That would be cheaper than paying the much higher subscription rate that gives full access to everything.

Thanks Kiwi, this is good to know.

Since the monthly array indicates a high in November it could be likely to be a 3 week rally back up so it can still close bullish on the month?
If it is just 3 days then the Dax will need to rally to the elected reversal on Monday, if it dos not, can we then assume it will be a 3 week retest?

The same should apply now for the EURUSD now the monthly reversal at 1.5530 has been elected, looks like it should be a 3 week rally back up, but I guess the problem we have is that unless Marty indicates there is a gap then we wont know, since for the time being Socrates only gives one reversal, which does not have to be the closest. Also, I read that the 1% rules is not valid if multiple reversals are elected at the same time, so only in the case of the DAX can we now be sure that the 1% rule is likely to take place. 

I've been following this thread for a while now and just registered because I needed to rant on this.

Why in God's name did he decide to explain away his incorrect position by posting the DJIA closing numbers in f*cking Euros this past week?

Look at this post:


WTF?! This makes no bloody sense. You're telling me that I need to start looking at different indices in varying foreign currencies to understand his BS? His stupid trading platform even was calling for a "Waterfall Event"and now it says "Brief Pause". What the hell does that mean?

Marty seriously needs to start using spellcheck.

Someone out there needs to make a counter blog where they post Marty's predictions with a screenshot of the blog post. Then when it doesn't come true, flame the heck out of him for his fake crap.

Here is the Dow Jones Industrial Index in dollars and Euro, While we have had this sell-off and everyone was touting interest rates & trade, it was really about the upcoming elections where the polls project the House will go back to the Democrats. This will only ensure further economic stagnation for the Democrats will do everything in their power to undermine Trump just so they can win back the Presidency in 2020. This enbittered style of politics is just divisive and ensures that the economy will only get worse.

Nonetheless, the market bounced with the Directional Change as it should have. However, the capital flows have swung again. While they turned negative at the top fearing the US elections, the loss of Merkel's CDU and her stepping down as party leader is the prelude to Merkel going out the door. We could even see this develop as soon as December.

Now look at the Dow in Euro compared to dollars. When the dollar perspective looks like a crash, the Euro perspective should a minor correction and support. The question is not how crazy things get in the USA, but how out of the mind things become in Europe in the aftermath of Merkel. Just look at the two charts with a simple uptrend line from the same point, What a difference a currency makes.

I say potential crash because he has written before about nasdaq crash down into the election, then he also talked about the entire cycle inverting and we go DOWN into 2020.  It seems the final verdict is still in play.  This idea of just consolidation now or on to new highs is not settled yet.

Also long term oscilattors such as MACD are turning down now as compared to 2016 election when everything was turning up

and last but not least the number of days from now until November 21 which is the ECM date, is the same number of days from the final high point of the 1929 peak right before a 40% PLUNGE in the DJIA

To make it without management is far more impressive- but yes, management is part of being a good trader. In fact, one can say that with bad/no management, any strategy can be turned unprofitable.

TRC, why do you say a potential crash then? I think it's just some fundamental stuff based on ECM. There was no Monthly Bearish elected but he said most likely a low next week.

I had asked a similar question a while ago re the DOW to Socrates Support and had a reply (from Erwin I think) regarding the election of Reversals and the time frame.  
His reply: "...If reversals are taken out you don't wait. The rule is, if we close above/below more then 1%, then the market will retrace to the reversal with no time given.
The rule of 3 applies to any reaction in a bear market usually the 3 time units. So if a rally is expected look for 3 time units.  Strong bear market 3 days or weeks. If a market needs to align itself like gold with other cycles it can be 3 quarters or 3 years as in Gold now.."

So the DAX closed 31 Oct at 1144751 and the Monthly Bear was "..1186880. Taking out this area and we have a large GAP down to the 1040000 zone.."
The September close was 1226589 and it closed October at 1144751, more than 1% past the 1186880 Monthly Reversal.  As there is a gap down i would class this as a strong bear market, so the 3 time-unit rally back up to test the reversal would be 3 days or weeks only - then gap down to 10400 by...? That 10400 price in my mind would intercede with TIME, so yes I think the next Time factors Marty mentions are "..We will also see December and February begin to shape up as important turning points which should produce the opposite of each other."

(Where he says "if the reversals are taken out you don't wait" was in relation to my query regarding the the DOW which was in its Bullish Phase Transition.  In that respect, taking out Bullish reversals by more than 1% in that sort of market, you just jump in and don't wait for any retest, because there is unlikely to be one in such a bullish market, and every Time turning point becomes a cycle inversion with new highs each time.)

MA, I did actually use a small account with real money to trade using purely Armstrong's predictions. I made a gain of 600% in 2 days before blowing up on a gap that went the wrong way on 0 day SPX options. Each trade was all in. It was excessively stupid, but an interesting experiment nonetheless. Of couse, it would be difficult to ascern validity with such a small amount of time and virtually no risk management. Had I used normal weekly options, I would have ended up with a gain. My own trading style is quite different, and I do not use the indexes.

Here are the typos.  It has been a long time, and I recalled incorrectly.  It wasn't fire/hire.

It was hire/higher, but this is not from his reader.  Only showed it as an example of his typo ability.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/greenspan-sees-inflation-or-stagflation-there-is-a-difference/
a shortage in supply will result in hire prices

This is the typo that I intended to comment, a typo from his reader:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170725212844/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/qa/what-books-are-there-for-monetary-history/

Keep up the hood work and see you in November.

So what's the chance of another person/reader who writes in this?  When was the last time that you see someone typing hood work instead of good work without realizing the typo in front of you.

As I said that Armstrong is probably an above-average trader.  So he probably could get things more correct than often, but it's not as he has claimed, "AI computer" that is not biased.  You need to collect Armstrong's specific forecasts to get the actual value from his stuffs.  The problem of being ambiguous is this.  Let's say I open a stock market newsletter.  If I keep the wording ambiguous, and let's say 45% of people traded wrong and 55% of the people traded correctly, due to a combination of my forecast wording and people's innate trading intuition, there will ALWAYS be some percentage of profitable trades from whatever I say.  As long as I can keep the 45% of the losing subscribers to hang on longer, and the drop off rates is less than the incoming rate, then my newsletter business will keep booming.  And since every time the people who lose in trades may not be the same people, it's not really a big problem for the constantly changing 45% of people to hang on.  The only person among all who can always win is the person who is publishing the newsletter.

The honest newsletter writers will post ACTUAL trades and keep a record, because they are actually good, and they have a real winning record to post for everyone to see.  Armstrong has none, and he doesn't keep track.  Again, all he needs to dispel this is to post a trade record in real-time, and shows a good trading profits from it consistently, beating index funds.  As long as it's a winning record, it's good.

Just want to clarify on his reader's typo of "hire" as "fire".  The chance of another reader having such flagrant typo (like Armstrong often does), together with the chance of having a super-psychic Armstrong not realizing the typo, and not correcting the typo, but simply sees "fire" as "hire" directly in his super-clairvoyant mind, is essentially zero.  A rare event of 0.01% chance can sometimes happen.  But to have two rare events of 0.01% chance happening at the same time will be 0.0001%, and that's basically impossible.

The alternative and much simpler explanation is simply that Armstrong was typing reader's questions in his mind, and obviously everything is crystal clear to him, since he is composing readers' questions.

It literally took me at least more than 2 minutes to realize that "hire" was mis-typed as "fire".

It's everything that added up, some lies here, some lies there, some mis-forecast here and there, etc.  And then I finally woke up.  And what I should have done all along was simply to test his forecast in a SYSTEMATIC way, and that would have told the story quickly, instead of having me persuading myself that I didn't understand his ECM correctly, or that I didn't subscribe to all of his private offering, etc.