Topic: Ryans' log - page 14. (Read 50747 times)

Add it to first post if you can or at least link from it.

I would make it a sticky in it's own topic if I could... The reality is that it will be buried in the thread in only a few more days, but thanks anyway!

I'm not pulling him up idiot, I'm complimenting him.

Are you asking me to just start spewing counts all over the place? 99% of which will just end up invalidated? I can do that, I'm just not sure if that is the most productive way to keep this thread. I mean, if that's what people want (more choices/ideas, and by default, more chance for error) I can do that. I don't have a problem with that. I have a ton of possible counts.

Hey Ryan, your posts have been really insightful and educational - thank you. One thing I think that would be really helpful would be some more focus on the alternate counts on shorter time frames - from my limited experience of EW counts, 'it is until it isn't' and that can result in a 'loss of centre' when a count is invalidated. Personally I find the shorter time frames extremely difficult to count and would appreciate any help you can give.

That's a suggestion, not a criticism - you are already giving a huge amount here and you surely have a large amount of eager pupils already 

I was simply replying that an ABC can potentially be the A of an even larger ABC. Not that I believe that is the case here

hell no, im offended that you say that adam, although i know you are trolling as nearly always so you are forgiven

falling is that you?

you guys have hunch about the next small top when last one was 492? looks like we are not breaking 500...

You catch on quick! That is exactly the situation. (I accidentally deleted the part about this rise being potentially a larger A wave which is also correct)

Edit:
I added the other part I was replying to.
I was on my phone earlier, so it was a pain in the butt to re-quote and retype my reply.

I think he's probably spent enough time with his excellent analysis without you pulling him up on cosmetics.

Kudos and keep up the great work Ryan. Your effort is much appreciated.

You should make that post bold as it is "The market in few words" for all newcomers to read.

I forgot to post this count last night. I said I would, so here it is...
This is the 1/2 count. The 2 has (at this point, anyway) stopped just short of hitting the 61.8% Fibo retracement which is typical of a 2nd wave. If this short term rally gets snuffed out here, then the next target lower will be around $400.


Declining volumes since this rise started and now hidden bearish divergence on the 4hr EWO makes this a likely candidate to take the place of the previously invalidated bear count.

Some other things to note; The Daily MACD still does not show divergence. We will either get a nice rise further here to make a decent high in the MACD before falling again to create the divergence or we will continue down in a few more waves before having another bounce to get the same type of situation that I just described. Either way, I'm not convinced of a sustained rally here until I get divergence on a longer period bar.  It looks more like a standard counter trend rally or "Suckers rally".

Ryan, your cultists are waiting and are getting nervous. Post more heroine! 

I'm trying to answer each point in order here...

Experience plays a huge role in counting waves. It's relatively easy to do, but some other factors go into choosing more and less probable counts. There are three simple rules to EW; 1)Wave-2 can not retrace more than 100% of wave-1. 2) Wave-3 is never the shortest wave. and 3) Wave-4 can not retrace into the price territory of wave-1. If you strictly adhere to these rules, it's not so hard. Then there are also a handful of guide lines that make things clearer, though the guide lines are not rules, but more often than not, waves follow the guide lines. Things like Alternation; Says that if wave-2 is a sharp correction, wave-4 will be more sideways and vice versa.
Fibonacci makes the targets a piece of cake as long as you have the right count. For instance, My previous wave-V count was invalidated, but since my targets were hit leading up to the invalidation, the latter waves were counted properly, but something else was amiss. That is when I revise my count and decide where things changed. Some counts/targets can also be correct but take vastly different paths to get there, which is why I have many running counts at any given time.

Intuition should be left out, as difficult as it may be. It is the same as a gut feeling, and while you may be right some, or even most times, it's no different than a guess. EW is a way to gauge probabilities and manage risk by having stops (which I will get into soon). It also tells you what is possible and what is impossible to happen next.

When you have many counts, you begin to see a move coming before it is even expected by your main count. I posted the chart in post #248 because of the underlying technicals and some other things going on. I guess you can say it was intuition, but I felt a change coming that was going to invalidate my count at the time, so I posted the chart. In fact, that is what I use this thread for. Kind of a "thinking out loud" of my thoughts (counts) as the market moves.

I hope I covered everything and answered your question.

Thanks for the excellent analysis as always!
When I first came across the EW theory (just a few months ago  ) , I had the impression that the individual analyst intuition had to play a major role in wave labeling and identification of waves personalities.
Your methodology however seems to also make use of an extremely rigorous mathematical analysis, with several different counts and sub-counts, strict invalidation levels, etc... it seems a huge amount of work, especially when you start to go deep in the sub-sub-waves counts!! 
So my question is - how big a role do experience and intuition play [if any] in the EW analyst work? Is there a point after which you can start to "read" wave counts and select the most likely one out of many, prior that strict invalidation levels come into play?

Main count invalidated for the wave-V. The chart from my last post is still valid and this is a refined version with invalidations and targets


If this count is to be, the 1 of c of IV/(iv) looks to be topping right now. Otherwise, another count has us still in the 2 of V. I'll have to get that chart together first. The above chart now looks better given the Bullish divergences that are present along with some actual Bullish momentum that we've seen today.
I'll post up that other chart as soon as I get it ready.

Good day!