Topic: Yet another analyst :) - page 41. (Read 269580 times)

I didn't mistaken That daily triangle has been drawn on 3rd April in this thread.

However I thought 1 wave will go deeper.

i can ask you the same question. can you identify the error(s) in your assumptions/model that caused you to have a bearish outlook before today?

I'd be interested to see the theory of how a bull run will play out at this stage.

i apologise, but i am not very familiar with specific EW terminology. i can't quite tell if you've answered my question. let me rephrase?

in the model you presented which i quoted, was there any indication of up or down at all? or did you need this price movement confirmation for it to be useful as a predictive model? further, now that you have a confirmation, can you predict the next movement? or is it the same case, and can only be validated after-the-fact?

Yeah, breaking up. It may start to draw daily triangle

A 3wave down correction confirms that there still up movement left for the (B). (C) Will be confirmed when we get 5waves down and 3 up.

triangles...lol

 

so, just for some accountability -- what made you so sure of these statements? :


... and how can you identify and correct a similar error in the future?

if you cannot easily answer these questions, as i suspect, then your methods are not rigorous enough.

OK, triangle broke up...

That leaves us with another possibility, we are still in (B)

no room for these bears, anyway, toot-toot


also, in all seriousness, this was a meaningful question. i respect the work you do but sometimes i question you rigor.

--arepo

Let's draw more triangles to "fit" the bearish scenario.

You may want to connect your lines with the actual candle sticks.

Leaving spaces only makes it easier to "move the goal posts" to make it look the way you want it to.

Excellent post indeed. I know that its very much a conscious exercise for me when trying to predict future price direction. You have to be extremely aware and critical of your own motivations and emotional attachments if you want to have any chance of success.

excellent post, and excellent list. cognitive science and the deconstruction of biases has always fascinated me. have you read anything by Daniel Dennett?

pretty much any predictive science only operates when enough rigor is maintained that the effects of these biases can be controlled, and it is difficult to tell just from analysis that is posted on these forums how rigorous the practitioner's methods are.

It is not a rational pleasure, it is actually painful to see how you and all the TA evangelists are so blind about their own rational loophole.
As a psychologist it is plain obvious to see that the TA techniques are flawed by its very root: humans are programmed to see patterns, even if there are none out there. It is a bias known as apophenia.

Next, all of your reasonings are ridden with cognitive biases.
The mere naming of oneselves as "bulls" and/or "bears" undermines any attempt of being objective, as it is very basic prejudice which WILL affect your perception of anything you analyze. The mere fact that all of you have stakes in bitcoins will definitely bias your judgement, and if you think you are being objective you are just kidding yourself. It is a human impossibility.
There are tons of research on prejudice, priming and apophenia that makes any type of pattern recognition inherently unreliable.
Let alone the very star of TA: the self-fulfilled prophecies.

I will tell you a very simple list of what all of the TA enthusiasts, even the smart ones, are being a victim of:

• Negativity Bias(bears)
• Optimist Bias(bulls)
• Hindsight Bias
• Confirmation Bias
• Bias Blind Spot
• Cogntive Dissonance
• Ad-Hoc Hypothesizing
• Apophenia
• Subjective Validation
• Gambler's Fallacy
• Expectation Bias
• Dunning–Kruger Effect
• Selective Recall
• Rosy Retrospection

If you are not familiar with some or any of this, then you are the most likely candidate to be a victim of your own humanity.
Everyone who claims to be using solely TA for their financial decisions are just as self-deceiving as esoteric believers.
Good day everyone.

I continue to redraw triangle because I see volume do not increase. Decreasing volume goes on all way drawing triangles. So unless there is a "BOOM" in volume - triangle still here. Besides, sma200 still supporting price (green).

2 things:

1 -- because external factors like supply/demand and other fundamentals do matter.

for instance, in the run-up from the last ATH to $266, many oscillators were screaming 'overbought' but we did not see a serious correction for a very long time because of an unprecedented influx of money proportional to the market cap.

2 -- you are much too sure.

price is a stochastic function. our models can never lend us so much certainty.

Why would EW not be applicable here?


The only way around the count i made is that this wave down is a 3 waver part of (B) which can have another leg up (Which is possible). Then (C) begins and should have 5 wave pattern.

unless of course, EW are not applicable here. i try to stay away from them for fear of apophenia 

also, TA refers to a variety of very different methods with different levels of applicability. everyone needs to cool it about 'who knows TA', it's not one thing.

--arepo

THIS ^ is known as "MOVING THE GOAL POSTS" to suit their theory.

LOL! ROFL! LAWL OMFG!