Topic: Question for E-wavers regarding the early history of Bitcoin (Read 1436 times)
Exactly! And even the 5th sub-wave of that rise is the largest
Cool. It's v of 5 of (3) of III that I'm referring to. So if you're saying that the entire runup after the Silk Road bust was wave v, does that make the Silk Road flashcrash iv?
If you don't mind, can you label wave 5 of (3) of III?
(I would think the peak at 130 would be i, the Silk Road bust would be ii, the peak at 760 would be iii, the crash to 380 would be iv, and obviously, the peak at 1150 would be v.)
I really appreciate your input here. The reason I'm asking these questions is to try to anticipate what (5) of III will look like and what to do with my cold storage coins.
If you don't mind, can you label wave 5 of (3) of III?
(I would think the peak at 130 would be i, the Silk Road bust would be ii, the peak at 760 would be iii, the crash to 380 would be iv, and obviously, the peak at 1150 would be v.)
I really appreciate your input here. The reason I'm asking these questions is to try to anticipate what (5) of III will look like and what to do with my cold storage coins.
Thank you.
While I agree with you on the first two, I'm not sure about the last (keep in mind I know little about Elliott Wave). It looks to me like the 5th wave of the late 2013 bubble is smaller than the 3rd wave.
While I agree with you on the first two, I'm not sure about the last (keep in mind I know little about Elliott Wave). It looks to me like the 5th wave of the late 2013 bubble is smaller than the 3rd wave.
Sorry, I mislabeled that one... This is the correct count
The whole run up after the SR bust is the 5th wave of (3) of III. The rise in January of 2012 to $7.22 was the (1) of III, the rise in August '12 to $15.40 was the 1 of (3) of III and $266 in April '13 was the (v) of (3) of III.
You need to think about the waves like precedence in mathematics. For every left parenthesis, there needs to be the closing parenthesis. This is like the sub-waves of each wave. The III has (1), (2), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5= top of (3), (4), and (5)= top of III.
Thank you.
While I agree with you on the first two, I'm not sure about the last (keep in mind I know little about Elliott Wave). It looks to me like the 5th wave of the late 2013 bubble is smaller than the 3rd wave.
While I agree with you on the first two, I'm not sure about the last (keep in mind I know little about Elliott Wave). It looks to me like the 5th wave of the late 2013 bubble is smaller than the 3rd wave.
5's are bigger in all the rallys throughout Bitcoins' short existence. Intraday 5's are often shorter than the 3.
Do you mind sharing some examples of such larger 5's?
I only labeled the 5ths, but there are others within these waves. The declines are a different story except the wave-II from $31.9099-$1.994
5's are bigger in all the rallys throughout Bitcoins' short existence. Intraday 5's are often shorter than the 3.
Do you mind sharing some examples of such larger 5's?
On a log chart, that 3 looks the smallest, but on a linear chart it definitely is not. EW goes by price, not percentage. This makes 5 the biggest with a ~$31 rise, 3 is $0.86 rise and the 1 is a $0.49 rise
There is nothing saying 5 must be shorter than 3. In stocks, 5 usually equals 1, but as you said, this is not the case in commodities, and Bitcoin does tend to act more like a commodity.
Wave-3 must not be the smallest, but it doesn't have to be the biggest either.
5's are bigger in all the rallys throughout Bitcoins' short existence. Intraday 5's are often shorter than the 3.
There is nothing saying 5 must be shorter than 3. In stocks, 5 usually equals 1, but as you said, this is not the case in commodities, and Bitcoin does tend to act more like a commodity.
Wave-3 must not be the smallest, but it doesn't have to be the biggest either.
5's are bigger in all the rallys throughout Bitcoins' short existence. Intraday 5's are often shorter than the 3.
Its difficult to say, as you point out. we would avoid the count where iii is the smallest wave.
Of coarse the liquidity and market access was terrible back then, so one is forgiven for taking an educated guess.
Ryan probably has some better ideas than I, but I'd say its a 5 wave, forget about counting it. If feel you must, assume that your current count is ok.
Of coarse the liquidity and market access was terrible back then, so one is forgiven for taking an educated guess.
Ryan probably has some better ideas than I, but I'd say its a 5 wave, forget about counting it. If feel you must, assume that your current count is ok.
I don't know much about Elliot Wave theory, but this is my count of the early history of the price of Bitcoin up through the "megabubble" which peaked in June 2011 and was followed by a monster bear market ($32--->$2).
Is my count correct? If so, why is 5 so much bigger than 3 and 1? Heck 3 is the smallest. Isn't it supposed to be the biggest?
To me, this looks like a typical commodity chart. Commodity bull runs typical end in blowoff tops. How does Elliot Wave account for that if wave 5 is supposed to be smaller than wave 3?
Jump to: