New Elliott Wave Rule Forums

The dow just took out its May high.

I wonder if there is a count that could account for differences like this. The S&P dropping from here along with the Dow after the Dow took out the May high. I suppose it is possible, but they seem to be so closely correlated. There are other forecasters with their different reasons for saying the S&P will drop soon. Will be interesting I guess.

(02-08-2012 10:03 AM)amala Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder if there is a count that could account for differences like this.
...

What if the Mar ’09 low was the Cycle C, Supercycle 4 low?

The future data I have, it was $1.00 below the May 2011. The May 2011 I have is 12869, with today having a high of 12868.

Matthew

(02-07-2012 05:47 PM)Perry Wrote: [ -> ]Eastern Time is GMT -5.

I think this is the section he is referring to, as it appeared to me:


I welcome suggestions, comments or corrections.
The degree symbols are Elwave’s: 11 is Mil, 12 sub-mil, etc.

Perry

That's the one Perry and labelled just like I have it - both right or both wrong

There is probably another one, if not two, higher up.

For those of you not in Europe, the Greek deal is coming under intense scrutiny.

Questions like, "What if a new Government gets elected in April by stating they will renege on the deal?". How could the Eurocrats stop that happening in a democratic country?

The VIX has been very low but has begun to rise. Some people use that combined with a rising market as a warning sign. It's not worth much by itself but if it adds to what you already think then ........

cheers theory

Absolutely gobsmacked that the board isn't alive with posts!

Key level in the market open count was 1356.48 from July 7th and yesterday it got upto 1355.87 without any fine detail ending pattern I could see.

So a reward:risk Short based on the really big picture, pending later confirmation on the local one, was how I saw it.

The move down to the Low on the 10th Feb is worth looking at IMO on both market open and Futures.

That level has been taken out on Futures but obvioulsly, given the time, not yet on market open.

cheers theory

Well, it looks to me like 1356 has been taken out now. My ES – Mini S&P data still shows the 2/7 low as holding. To me the highs & lows on the ES are looking kind of different from market open at present.

I’ve been trying to count this. I’ve had quite a bit of trouble clearly identifying the corrective patterns. Anyway, here’s what it looks like to me:

[attachment=822]
I welcome suggestions, comments or corrections.

The degree symbols are Elwave’s:
Micro: I – V, A,B,C
Sub-Micro: i-v, a,b,c
Mil 11:1-5,11:a,b,c
Sub-Lil 12:1-5,11:a,b,c
Etc.

Perry

(02-16-2012 11:06 PM)Perry Wrote: [ -> ]Well, it looks to me like 1356 has been taken out now. My ES – Mini S&P data still shows the 2/7 low as holding. To me the highs & lows on the ES are looking kind of different from market open at present.

I’ve been trying to count this. I’ve had quite a bit of trouble clearly identifying the corrective patterns. Anyway, here’s what it looks like to me:


I welcome suggestions, comments or corrections.

The degree symbols are Elwave’s:
Micro: I – V, A,B,C
Sub-Micro: i-v, a,b,c
Mil 11:1-5,11:a,b,c
Sub-Lil 12:1-5,11:a,b,c
Etc.

Perry

Hi Perry,

The 1356 was a "brickwall" on many EWT counts but only a "psychological" one in NEWR because the 4th is allowed to enter the DMZ beyond the end of the 2nd.

I don't mind this happening on subwave internals at the deeper levels because of the beneficial side effects of simplifying the counts within correctives. I therefore have to accept that it can happen at the higher degrees because of the fractal nature of the waves.

What does concern me is why Elliott didn't freely allow them in all situations, not just in highly leveraged ones. Was it that over the period he was collecting and analysing data that they didn't occur at all frequently? And if they did, they were explained away with an equally valid looking alternative?

Anyway back to the present. There was no ending pattern on the shorter timeframe and it didn't stop. I agree 100% with your key internal levels from 10th Feb onwards (haven't checked the others). We know where the next "must stop before" level is for the bigger picture and this time it would be a pleasant surprise to see some confirming detail from the "now" data.

Right from the start of usung NEWR, I found that the "not taking out of a key level within the local trend" was a very useful way of thinking. What I referred to at the time as getting "now" correct and letting the future look after itself.

cheer theory

Thanks for the feedback.

Would you explain a little more about what you mean by:

“I found that the "not taking out of a key level within the local trend" was a very useful way of thinking. What I referred to at the time as getting "now" correct and letting the future look after itself.”

And, what it means to you?

Thanks,
Perry

(02-17-2012 04:29 AM)theoryman Wrote: [ -> ]... in NEWR because the 4th is allowed to enter the DMZ beyond the end of the 2nd.

I don't mind this happening on subwave internals at the deeper levels because of the beneficial side effects of simplifying the counts within correctives. I therefore have to accept that it can happen at the higher degrees because of the fractal nature of the waves.

What does concern me is why Elliott didn't freely allow them in all situations, not just in highly leveraged ones. Was it that over the period he was collecting and analysing data that they didn't occur at all frequently? And if they did, they were explained away with an equally valid looking alternative?

...

That is exactly right. During his time the overriding degree was motive
and that has a tendency not to have this overlap in the post-breakout
area. The market then moved on for 7 decades of bullish action and
our buddy later passed on.

Apparently enough confusion existed between questions about overlap
and guessing about the extension apparition to muddy the water and
prevent scrutiny of the rules even after greater detail was available.

You can never have too much detail unless, that is, you would be
obligated to use it in order to undergird the "faith of the faithful".
Then a neverending stream of ticks might be considered a curse.

Overlap in pre-breakout and other corrective internals could easily
have been overlooked under the umbrella of an "extensions
working model".