place the A where you have the B, the B where you have C, and the C where you have D
now it makes sense
Bitcoin Analysis 22 replies
Bitcoin-Family math and technical analysis 20 replies
Fundamental Analysis, Technical Analysis Or Graph Analysis? 28 replies
Disliked{quote} Hello, It definitely appears as the most optimistic outcome, I find your method very fascinating, I don't quiet understand it, but your results speaks for it. I might consider an other triangle within the purple line of your first chart before a sharp move. Good night/day trading everyone @Infinitus, my original reaction was toward the article you quote, sorry If it sounded like I was trying to defend my position, my intention was only to bring a bit of relativity toward some opinions we constantly find in...Ignored
DislikedJust a thought..... IF Bitcoin is to go to the moon...Over 3000. Then it is possible wave 3 is underway & we are now starting wave 3 of 3 of 5. Just remember I am no EW etition.... {image}Ignored
Disliked{quote} KO, Judging from my own great EWetitionism recently I would be wise not to pass judgement on your count - no reason at all that your count is not the case... i am leaning toward learning your magic trendline method for its greater eficacy at predicting the same waves that the "Wave" Principle cannot!Ignored
Disliked{quote} The only part of those counts I would be prepared to change at present is ( If Bitcoin is headed for the moon) placing wave 1"yellow" where wave 3 is. This would mean we are currently shagging around in wave 2 of 1 of 5....... I hardly ever label waves. Only do so to promote discussion. ( Born stirrer)..Ignored
Disliked{quote} infinitus, on a serious note and regarding principle, you mentioned Bitcoin is in Cycle degree yesterday. Can you substantiate that because as far as I understand the Wave Principle is sequential and we cannot attain Cycle degree wave 1 without first completing the component subwaves. Given the 4 year chart history and the broader Cycle degree in other commodities, we should not even have completed Intermediate degree 1 yet. You see what I mean?Ignored
Disliked{quote} clever and naughty both - a true Kiwi allow me to speak truthfully for a moment (since you are the only one present to hear me): The count is IMO actually irrelevant - few people are aware that the pushermen of EWP (namely EW International) have not gotten a wave forecast right for 20 years and there is little of substance I (or anyone else) can confidently say about Bitcoin using EW analysis. I believe this chart is in its initial small degree baby-waves. Putting 1 and 1 together we know for a fact it's going way up at some point in...Ignored
Disliked{quote} infinitus, on a serious note and regarding principle, you mentioned Bitcoin is in Cycle degree yesterday. Can you elaborate on that because as far as I understand the Wave Principle is sequential and we cannot attain Cycle degree wave 1 without first completing the component subwaves. Given the 4 year chart history and the broader Cycle degree in other commodities, we should not even have completed Intermediate degree 1 yet. You see what I mean?Ignored
Disliked{quote} Good morning Yeah, but you had to give him all your Tulips ! Bad, bad, bad move More seriously, I had a question about proportion, did you find a common time factor between wave of different degree. For example 59 weeks at intermediate degree from 1 to 3 is 0.39 of 150. Was it similar as a primary degree ? If so, in your opinion, how valid would it be to use time ratio as a confirmation of one count ?Ignored
Disliked{quote} Good morning Lady, hope you had wonderful dreams (the tulips, the tulips are hunting me) I am not a big fan of time considerations in Elliott Wave. I think Elliott himself had not find some good time relationships. What we can see, is, that there is sometimes kind of fib-time-relationship. But out of my view does not work very good, only in hindsight. As stated earlier, the wave degrees are somewhat dynamical. Sometimes a primary takes a few months, another time it takes years. So I can not see any rule here. Maybe a good idea here...Ignored
Disliked{quote} Good morning Lady, hope you had wonderful dreams (the tulips, the tulips are hunting me) I am not a big fan of time considerations in Elliott Wave. I think Elliott himself had not find some good time relationships. What we can see, is, that there is sometimes kind of fib-time-relationship. But out of my view does not work very good, only in hindsight. As stated earlier, the wave degrees are somewhat dynamical. Sometimes a primary takes a few months, another time it takes years. So I can not see any rule here. Maybe a good idea here...Ignored