The main problem I am still encountering when applying NEWR in real time, is the ease with which I can convert a three wave pattern into a five wave one.
This arises because unlike in EWT, where wave2 must be >20% wave1, there is no limit on the relative smallness of the wave2. IMO it then becomes far too easy to change what you had as ABC into 12345 simply by turning the A into 123 by allowing a tiny 2.
Is the converse true, i.e. does the same issue also allow a five to be counted as a three? Yes it does, either simply by ignoring a tiny 2 you had put in or by adding one like before, when the count is just starting.
If it is that easy to flip between threes and fives, how can we hope to arrive at the definitive count BEFORE it occurs? [I have posted before that my after the event technique allows me to label the waves to perfection.
]
cheers theory
Theory, Short of devising a new guideline perhaps there is no way for sure till you reach the first RTB. P.S Reading a book called Dynamic Trading at the moment, it seems to recognize many of the limitations with traditional Elliott wave analysis and tries to get round this essentially by mapping waves onto a time grid. My current thinking is this sort of approach combined with looking for RTB's proximate to a predicted time zone for a wave to end.
Sounds interesting, Dan.
I think a screenshot might help us, theoryman.
Here's a blank version of one on the FTSE, where in real time, I could not find the finishing pattern required in this last section.
The more detailed data is no longer available, so this is the best I can do now. Even when it was, I couldn't find what I needed.
[
attachment=91]
After the event I can force a count, which I will post after I get back from a short break.
In the meantime maybe others would like to see if they can arrive at a pivot count but only by thinking forwards in time.
I realise that already knowing it was a key turning point must effect your mindset but there could well be an obvious solution that I am not seeing.
Luckily several other indices made higher Highs after the one on the FTSE and had clear ending patterns, so I went with that viewpoint.
It could well be though that the FTSE is the one where there isn't an ending pattern yet, we are in a 4th down, with a new High to come. Which "must" mean that there will be bounce of some sort on all the others, might not be new Highs on those but could be high % retraces.
cheers theory
My problem is that I cannot get a confirming NEWR count if I put the waves in where I think they ought to go.
The detail below the 5 min level was so messy that whatever count you wanted, you could argue a case for it.
So here is a solution constructed after the event - its role is to show how confirmation bias can allow you to see what you want/need to see in order to get the outcome you want/need.
I show the three subwaves of the retrending 4ths in red, with each subsequent subwave 5th changing to a different colour.
The black 2nd is OK in terms of size for both EWT & NEWR but the only way I can then fit in the pattern for the black 5th is to have a tiny purple 2nd subwave.
[
attachment=108]
So there are several possibilities:
1 there is no ending pivot count to be seen, the count is a fabricated one & there is a higher High to come.
2 there is a better ending count and I can't see it.
3 this is the count and tiny 2nds are OK but how can you know at the time that such miniscule detail will turn out to be so vital?
cheers theory
(05-04-2010 04:03 AM)theoryman Wrote: [ -> ]My problem is that I cannot get a confirming NEWR count if I put the waves in where I think they ought to go.
The detail below the 5 min level was so messy that whatever count you wanted, you could argue a case for it.
So here is a solution constructed after the event - its role is to show how confirmation bias can allow you to see what you want/need to see in order to get the outcome you want/need.
I show the three subwaves of the retrending 4ths in red, with each subsequent subwave 5th changing to a different colour.
The black 2nd is OK in terms of size for both EWT & NEWR but the only way I can then fit in the pattern for the black 5th is to have a tiny purple 2nd subwave.
So there are several possibilities:
1 there is no ending pivot count to be seen, the count is a fabricated one & there is a higher High to come.
2 there is a better ending count and I can't see it.
3 this is the count and tiny 2nds are OK but how can you know at the time that such miniscule detail will turn out to be so vital?
cheers theory
Sorry, There still is not enough info to go by in this pic.
I was not able to load the detail in my usual chart for some reason but I hunted down a chart. The area I show seems to match dates but the pricing seems different.
The chart does show a new high by a slight bit after the 28th and then continues lower.
I do not see any problem with size comparisons in this area. It is very shallow and is on a small scale intraday chart.
Cannot do anything but make that casual observation by way of assistance without more to use for details.
I cannot even say whether this should be an area for NEWR application.
[
attachment=109]
Tom,
The chart you have posted is for the 27th April to 4th May, my section was for the High at ~5840 made on the 16th April.
The date at the top of the chart, FTSE (28-Apr-10) is when I accessed the data and not when it occurred. The bold 16 on the bottom timeline is the key number, apologies for not making that clear.
cheers theory
(05-05-2010 01:49 AM)theoryman Wrote: [ -> ]Tom,
The chart you have posted is for the 27th April to 4th May, my section was for the High at ~5840 made on the 16th April.
The date at the top of the chart, FTSE (28-Apr-10) is when I accessed the data and not when it occurred. The bold 16 on the bottom timeline is the key number, apologies for not making that clear.
cheers theory
no problem - just sorry I could not be of more help.