New Elliott Wave Rule Forums

In your chart, you currently have us in red ".a". Look at that wave's subwaves, I have wave 4 at 1150, meaning we should be in a 1-2-3-a-b-4c-5 from 1150 to finish your red .a (and it has to happen before 1220).

You are going to have me call the top ;-) When I claim we can use NEWR in realtime ;-)

1150 is the obvious candidate for sure. Doing wave counts past that seems to match up. I am not able to call the high's with NEWR though, there are just so many possibilities with the rules. From what I see the current price fits as a high on a 10 min chart. But honestly I have been seeing possible terminations for a long time. I guess if 1220 doesn't hold we have to rework months of price action since the count from Aug 31 seems to be fixed.

I may have posted similar charts before calling for the top (the end is near)

From the rules with 3 level deep nesting, it seems to work. There are a couple double top / double bottom's. I could not get more clarification from the SPX because apparently there is no after hours trading. This is for the ES.

[attachment=649]

(10-12-2011 12:36 PM)amala Wrote: [ -> ]I may have posted similar charts before calling for the top (the end is near)

From the rules with 3 level deep nesting, it seems to work. There are a couple double top / double bottom's. I could not get more clarification from the SPX because apparently there is no after hours trading. This is for the ES.

As of right now price action has broken the Sep 20 highs on the SPY & the /ES, the SPX high is still holding. I don't have much hope for it.

Well it has dropped 20 points without breaking the origin price on SPX, which is the true index. If we get the expected move you will have a believer ;-)

yes, that was a close one! Would be absolutely amazing if it holds. Like you, I don't have much faith.

(10-12-2011 07:43 PM)finster869 Wrote: [ -> ]yes, that was a close one! Would be absolutely amazing if it holds. Like you, I don't have much faith.

I would like to spend more time and understand more how to apply it. For instance the leg I posted a few posts ago was a clear example of an ABC move and could NOT be labeled as a 5 wave move. The problem is those legs are difficult to find for me. Usually I am not able to tell the difference. Seems the key to proper labeling in this NEWR is those kind of legs which lets us decide. (that is where some software can be applied)

Is the best way to label to find legs like that and work backwards or to take the birds eye view and say, hey on this daily chart we can see 2-3 big waves, don't try to force or squeeze in the other two.

Anyway I would love to get more into some other charts, and I want to label gold, silver and get cable up to date from what Tom did. I don't expect Tom to do the counts for us, just asking him to review a chart is a lot of work, would love to get more people involved, but this forum is either thin or we have lots of lurkers.

I think this discovery makes sense. In kind of layman's terms it means at termination of moves you will recursively have price movement which breaks retracements, but then again retraces. So it is a kind of weakening of the trend which signals change.

The technique i tried to learn before was using retracements to predict future price action, using the largest (in time) retracements in a move and using fibonacci extensions, but it was too hit or miss (and I paid a lot for it!) The teacher would only show in retrospect, and basicly backfit his analysis.

This rule is loose enough to be universal, but has a specificity that can be applied. It does take work though. I am not afraid of that, i just want it to pay off!

After this move plays out, I will be interested in the wave count of the move up from Oct 4 and see how a definitive wave count will look and then see if we could have practically found a top. Maybe this technique doesn't really give us that, maybe it can only tell us that without breaking origin of the wave, we will start a B which has a target. That is still big information.

(10-12-2011 11:05 PM)amala Wrote: [ -> ]Is the best way to label to find legs like that and work backwards or to take the birds eye view and say, hey on this daily chart we can see 2-3 big waves, don't try to force or squeeze in the other two.

Not sure what you meant by that last part but the best way to label
is always to know what degree you are in and the actual wave that is
building in that degree. Then find the actual detailed count for what
is there. By knowing the degree and build you know exactly what can
and cannot happen in formations by rules.

That brings me to your next comment.

Quote:This rule is loose enough to be universal, but has a specificity that can be applied.

The rule fits in with all of EW rules and is extremely tight, not loose
at all. In fact the NEWR tightens up the rules to a considerable degree.

In traditional EW you could never quite know if you had your count
right. Someone could ALWAYS make it seem so, however. All they
needed was some nice looking straight lines and some extra letters.

Now that is what I call loose.

In reality however most of that stuff was 'made up'. The waves really
can only do what falls within the rules. There are only 12345ABC and
that is all the waves do.

It was discovered during this truthful look at waves that some things,
through a misunderstanding of what was actually happening, were
added that did not fit the waves. For example the limitation on the
travel of wave 4 from entering wave 1 territory.

If you do place this artificial throttle on the wave and also allow
extensions to appear here and there you will definitely need some
extra letters or your whole ruleset would crash.

My whole point in commenting is that wave 4's ability to correct all
the way into wave 1 or having an RTB in certain waves does not
make the rules loose. The entire time 4 is moving along its route it is
being built by subwaves that follow the rules and it is itself following
rules in that build.

Does a snowflake (another self-similar naturally occuring fractal)
follow crystalline formation rules? You bet. Can you follow it in real
time? That may depend on what you bring to the table. You have
good equipment and tools. You know what the rules are. You watch
an incredible number of them and learn their tricks.

Just don't breath.

I guess they both present some challenges, huh?

Tom

Thanks, is see your point on the self validating nature since we have the nested 4's & C's and rules to apply when we drill down. With the rules, I believe we have to drill down though.

As a kind of practice I tried to apply the rules to the move down from yesterday on the S&P. I am finding that not having the overnight data with the SPX is ok, and it gives more clarity that the ES. What I found which made the count correct was being able to definitively mark segments as 3 wave moves which could not be 5 wave moves from the requirement that the third wave not be the shortest. Focusing on that aspect and looking for the corrective waves seemed to be useful for me and helped earlier to identify that your count from Aug 31st had no alternative.

As for realtime use, I think spotting the 3 wave corrective waves is probably the most useful. Find segments which cannot be 5 waves, place them and then go from there. This particular move is interesting. It is not an RTB move, and I believe with the move presented before us, we could definitively mark it as such. So therefore one could possibly use this in a bigger picture to orient a move.


But I don't think one could use NEWR to tell you that price action would stop at 1190.61 and have this very short 5th wave.

That is probably the subject of your next book ;-)

[attachment=650]

Corrective move from 11:15am, searching for "2 (end of *5)



first possiblity (still searching for A not likely):
[attachment=651]

second possibility ("a & "b of "ii is done):

I am leaning towards the second. I think there are problems going into the 3:15pm peak otherwise. Based on this, we have to find the "c which means up (counter-trend) tomorrow upto max of 1220 again (dunno how long) and then resume downwards.

[attachment=653]

If it all breaks above 1220 then these wave counts are all not valid, and I put a lot of time into these!!