Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tom, two questions for you.
11-12-2010, 10:27 AM
Post: #1
Tom, two questions for you.
Tom,

Can't remember the answer to this one and can't track it down in the threads, sorry. If the "subwave a of the RTB" goes beyond the end of the 3rd, must the "subwave c of the RTB" go past the end of the "subwave a" or can it just truncate?

I have a count using market open openly data which had a very defendable level at 1204.1 on the S&P (SB company data). When the market closed, it was well above that level.

Out of hours it crashed down through it but by opening time of the next day, it was back above it again, only just but it was there.

I used the opportunity to open up another position and set up another risk free position.

My question is, "How does such a significant move out of hours, which does not appear on the charts you and finster use, fit in with NEWR thinking? Something like that must reflect sentiment (mental) but it isn't there (visual wave count)."

cheers theory
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
11-13-2010, 01:40 AM
Post: #2
RE: Tom, two questions for you.
(11-12-2010 10:27 AM)theoryman Wrote:  Tom,

Can't remember the answer to this one and can't track it down in the threads, sorry. If the "subwave a of the RTB" goes beyond the end of the 3rd, must the "subwave c of the RTB" go past the end of the "subwave a" or can it just truncate?

The subwave C must complete beyond that of subwave A of any ABC (non-RTB)
formation. Truncation possibilities are limited to 5th waves only. The
wave which exhibits a truncation may never cause a wave to fail and
must contain full valid five subwave structure.

In other words the travel of the 5th wave is the only irregularity, not the
form. In non-RTB, a C not extending beyond travel of A would mean a failed
wave formation which does not and cannot occur.
Quote:I have a count using market open openly data which had a very defendable level at 1204.1 on the S&P (SB company data). When the market closed, it was well above that level.

Out of hours it crashed down through it but by opening time of the next day, it was back above it again, only just but it was there.

I used the opportunity to open up another position and set up another risk free position.

My question is, "How does such a significant move out of hours, which does not appear on the charts you and finster use, fit in with NEWR thinking? Something like that must reflect sentiment (mental) but it isn't there (visual wave count)."

cheers theory

On this I can't comment, not being familiar with the source of your data.
The S&P futures operate outside market hours to a small extent and I
would not rule out wave formation utilizing that data since the S&P
trades in such a tight relationship as the futures go.

Price levels of course are only defendable with wave counts that negate
any possible incursions by rule. Those situations exist in theory and 4
degrees historical, if you know what I mean. Wink

Been there done that.

Smile

TS Hennessy
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
11-13-2010, 04:43 AM (This post was last modified: 11-13-2010 06:10 AM by theoryman.)
Post: #3
RE: Tom, two questions for you.
Thanks Tom, thought that must be the case because it was a three, even though by retrending it's a different flavour.

The rest of the answer raised more questions though.....

If truncation can only occur in a 5th, but the truncation comes at the end of something that does not have all the attributes of a 5th; then what should we do?

Does it mean that the data is invalid and should be ignored? Or does it mean the first hit on the level must be the end of something and any subsequent bounce(s) is/are a retrace(s) back to the start of the new move?

I looked at it from 3 bounces off the same level.

The third can't be the truncation of the 5th because the previous one would have to be the RTB and that would have to be below the first, which would be the 3rd - but they are all at the same level, so that can't be right.

The second might be the truncation of the 5th provided the previous move had all the attributes of 123 A RTB and the first bounce was the end of the RTB.

If the first isn't labelled as an RTB, then either it was the end of a move and I've missed it or the data is not useable.

Or it's something I haven't thought of.......

The most difficult counts for me are when the data contains a lot of equal values in a limited time span. Is it the true repeated testing of resistance/support or just market noise? The former is vital in terms of market sentiment the latter should be ignored.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The emini S&P DEC Futures has the latest High on the 9th rather than the 5th. So not only does the Futures chart include significant moves when the market is closed, it also gives a different sequence of events when it is open.

In the S&P thread, Steely Dan's latest charts show the data from the same supplier as I use. It includes data when the Futures are open but the market isn't, they have the latest High on the 5th.

So unless I am mistaken, there are three counts depending on which data you use and those three counts, in this case, are very different.

Should we argue that since only one can be correct, two must be wrong and which two is it?

Or is it each represents data that is valid from its own point of view, they are all correct and it's a matter of deciding which point of view is the one we should be using in this case?

Added as an edit. Just remembered reading somewhere that when trading/gambling on an Index, you should always use the Futures. The reason being the Index is NOT directly tradeable since it is a value calculated ever x seconds (FTSE x=15) from the weighted constituent share prices. The Futures, however, is calculated every 1 second based on contracts traded on the future value of the Index and as such is a much better guide to sentiment.

cheers theory
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
11-27-2010, 04:05 PM
Post: #4
RE: Tom, two questions for you.
(11-13-2010 04:43 AM)theoryman Wrote:  If truncation can only occur in a 5th, but the truncation comes at the end of something that does not have all the attributes of a 5th; then what should we do?

Does it mean that the data is invalid and should be ignored?

It's hard to ignore data we would need to rely upon...

However as you correctly point out further...
Quote:The emini S&P DEC Futures has the latest High on the 9th rather than the 5th. So not only does the Futures chart include significant moves when the market is closed, it also gives a different sequence of events when it is open.
...
Should we argue that since only one can be correct, two must be wrong and which two is it?

Or is it each represents data that is valid from its own point of view, they are all correct and it's a matter of deciding which point of view is the one we should be using in this case?

This is just what gaps are all about. The sentiments upon which percieved
values are based, becoming prices exchanged, continue to change and
move even if they do not print ANYWHERE. Over weekends it is often
dramatic but here we have one midday between the index and futures.

I believe that Elliott Wave rules and form exist in that ethereal flux.
That is one area where I would have to allow the use of the term theory.

Quote:Added as an edit. Just remembered reading somewhere that when trading/gambling on an Index, you should always use the Futures. The reason being the Index is NOT directly tradeable since it is a value calculated ever x seconds (FTSE x=15) from the weighted constituent share prices. The Futures, however, is calculated every 1 second based on contracts traded on the future value of the Index and as such is a much better guide to sentiment.

I believe this answers your questions. The 9th of Nov. as an ending to
that wave is most likely the correct interpretation and count and I also
subscribe to using the futures of an index, having traded futures in the past Wink.
(sorry couldn't resist that one)

Smile

TS Hennessy
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Hi Tom, just 2 questions spike1 10 6,858 08-27-2010 04:55 AM
Last Post: spike1

Forum Jump: