[edited out].
My targets are also slightly different, I mean I didn't set buy orders at round figures... one problem, though, with setting targets at very specific levels clearly identified by previous support/resistance level, trend lines, fibonacci levels, etc. is that the pros know them all too well and chances are they are going to spin the market around these marks very very fast, making it difficult for people to enter/exit the market at these specific and very precise levels.
Well if you are getting caught up in too much mathematics, you are missing some various points, including actualities that human behavior cannot be completely mathematized. So even if a whole bunch of supposed "experts" are coming to similar conclusions, you gotta understand that those mathematical points are going to have some variance, including variance that can be attributed to inabilities to precisely mathematize human behaviors - even when you believe you got some kind of fool proof formula.
Regarding the specific numbers, of course there are strategies to NOT put your orders at the exact places that a large number of others have their orders, and there are a variety of ways to tweak those points in order to attempt to ensure that your orders have higher chances of getting filled at the point of reversal.. .. while accounting that maybe you are being too greedy too if you are trying to max out too much, as well... furthermore, incrementalism does ameliorate a lot of these kinds of problems because you are not trying to time maximums and your orders end up being a whole hell-of-a lot smaller so they may not get in the way of the otherwise market dynamics, as much... but yeah, one of the downfalls of incrementalism is that you lessen the potential to make as much money, yet I would argue (and I do argue) that your odds of making money are much increased by not even attempting to eeke out extra profits - because in the end.. fucking human behavior is too difficult to mathematize with any kind of precision.. that will fuck you up in the end if you are engaged in such profit eeking attempts on an ongoing basis.
My suggestion is to identify the levels and then give it some leeway in setting your buy/sell orders erring on the side of caution to make sure your trades are executed.
We agree here.
I concede we are in a bull market and I believe we are just undergoing a correction. Whether this is an ABC correction (3 steps Eliot wave) or proper impulse wave (5 steps) down - that temporarily inverts the trend - remains to be seen. In the first case I think the target is around 3800-3700 USD, in the second case around 2800-3000 USD. I'm unsure about the odds, but at the moment I see a slightly higher probability this is just an ABC correction, precisely because the underlaying bullish sentiment is so strong. Sooner or later however there will be a deeper correction that will retrace to at least -61,8% Fibonacci level of whatever upleg it will follow, meaning, for those not versed in TA jargon, that 2/3 of previous gains will be wiped out.
These are all fair enough assessments.. but again I just view you as attempting to put way too fucking much precision on these concepts, and in the end, you are much better off to come to some kind of assessment of what the odds are regarding each possible direction (and to frame those odds in terms of a range rather than exact numbers).
So for example, I might assess that we are currently hovering between $4150 and $4350, and the odds of breaking above $4350 are 55% and the odds of breaking below $4150 is below 45%... Thereafter, I can attribute further odds to either of the possible directions, and each time I go out further in the resistance or support points, I should consider the odds to become much more uncertain and a greater range. Accordingly, I might consider that if the price breaks above $4350, then the odds of it breaking $4550 are 55% - however, before it breaks $4350, I might consider the odds of breaking $4550, at this point, to be only 47% to 52% - some kind of ball park assessment that is more uncertain because getting to the higher price points or the higher ranges depend upon breaking resistance at lower levels.
Even if you are kind of tentative about your assessments about breaking one way or another and ability to break through various points in one direction or another, you are much better off making these kinds of contingent assessments than you are concluding some kind of certitude assessment that the price is going to retrace 61.8% no matter what, bullshit assessment.
I agree with you about retraces are inevitable; however, your assertion that they are inevitable no matter what is assuming that the price is overheated at some point, so you gotta look at the price performance dynamics in context to assess whether the market is overheated, and also consider that various corrections, including this recent 20% correction, removes some of the likelihood that we are currently overheated and likely staves off the 61.8% correction that you perceive to be "inevitable" at some uncertain point in the future.. that you don't fucking know when exactly except, you supposedly know that it is going to happen at some point.. yeah right
By the way, we recognize 20% to 30% corrections to be quite common in the bitcoin space in recent months - even going back two years, and we also have had one or two corrections in the 50% ballpark... so yeah, of course, if prices shoot up to $10k in the next 2 months, then the chances of a 61.8% or more correction becomes more likely.. however, if we diddly daddle with a bunch of ups and downs and continuing corrections of 20% to 30%, and then it takes a year to get to $10k, then the supposed "inevitability" of a 61.8% correction becomes a lot fucking less "inevitable" at that point. Can you agree? Let's say that such a scenario plays out and it takes 6months or more to get to $10k with a bunch of corrections and maybe it even takes close to a year, then in order to achieve an "ineveitable" 61.8% correction, we may have to get a price spurt of 50% or 100% to bring quickly into the $15k to $20k price territory.
So my point is that we have to consider a bit more of the specifics before we start to argue that a 61.8% correction is "inevitable" under the current day prices and what might have to happen first before 61.8% becomes inevitable.. there are probabilities involved. Sure, we could continue another leg down and get a 61.8 % correction in the coming week; however, what are the odds? Maybe less than 20%? Anyway, I am not saying that 61.8% is not going to happen or that it could not happen right fucking now; however you gotta consider odds, rather than proclaiming inevitability without providing any kind of decent assessment of probabilities and presenting your claims in bullshit certitude framework.
I agree, incrementalism is in the long term the safest - and often also the most profitable - way to proceed unless you are very very confident to have nailed a long term bottom or top at which to take your position and times proves to be have been right. I stress the fact that these tops or bottoms have to be long term, to be seen on weekly or monthly time frames. These opportunities do not come around often. If you don't see one coming your way already, then incrementalism is definitely the best option.
I don’t think that anyone can beat incrementalism. Sure you can play around with some of you portfolio on the ends, maybe even dedicate a higher percentage of your gambling to some view that you might have – and I do this a tiny bit from time to time, maybe even with about 10% of my holdings.. and I could forsee some time that I might even employ up to 50% of my holdings to a certain direction beyond incrementalism – however, the more you deviate from incrementalism, the more you are engaged in gambling, rather than investing.
You seem to be suggesting that right now we are in some kind of certain times, and I will give you that the certainty could rise to a level of 60% or even 70% and still be kind of reasonable (even though way beyond my expectations), and even if you have a 60% or a 70% view, I think you would be engaging in unnecessary risk taking to allocate anything beyond 70% to that viewpoint.. and I would rather deal with much smaller percentages and I would feel quite adventurous to put 20% towards something that I believe to be 70% odds.. which is rare for me to even conclude 70% on any of these BTC price market dynamics at any given time.
