Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
C4s - can someone check my thoughts?
02-06-2011, 07:37 AM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2011 07:44 AM by theoryman.)
Post: #1
C4s - can someone check my thoughts?
I think we had a set of rising end of C4 levels on the S&P, so the next 5th started from there....., onwards and upwards.

What I forgot was just how far the C4 in the big picture 0 1 2 3 A RTB C4 could retrace if the RTB was one - it could go all the way back to the 0.

So that final C4 is only constrained by not being allowed to go below the origin of that whole section. In other words it, can ignore all previous internal C4s in the previous move up - no matter how solid they were.

   

Every other part of the move up from the black 0 is hidden to avoid confusing detail, it's the end that matters in this argument.

The diagram is not drawn to scale either.

The C4 in the purple count has to stay above the 0 of the purple count.

Once the RTB of the black count is in, the C4 of that can ignore the C4 level in the purple count - it's done with, it's done its job.

It might bounce before, it might bounce off it or it can move through it.

The true support level was the horizontal black line and not the one at the end of the purple C4.

What can happen is all those who are Long and hiding below the purple C4 Low think "OOPS!". Longs being closed equals Shorts being opened and wham!

Thoughts please.

cheers theory
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2011, 10:20 AM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2011 10:45 AM by upstreamdave.)
Post: #2
RE: C4s - can someone check my thoughts?
(02-06-2011 07:37 AM)theoryman Wrote:  I think we had a set of rising end of C4 levels on the S&P, so the next 5th started from there....., onwards and upwards.

What I forgot was just how far the C4 in the big picture 0 1 2 3 A RTB C4 could retrace if the RTB was one - it could go all the way back to the 0.

So that final C4 is only constrained by not being allowed to go below the origin of that whole section. In other words it, can ignore all previous internal C4s in the previous move up - no matter how solid they were.



Every other part of the move up from the black 0 is hidden to avoid confusing detail, it's the end that matters in this argument.

The diagram is not drawn to scale either.

The C4 in the purple count has to stay above the 0 of the purple count.

Once the RTB of the black count is in, the C4 of that can ignore the C4 level in the purple count - it's done with, it's done its job.

It might bounce before, it might bounce off it or it can move through it.

The true support level was the horizontal black line and not the one at the end of the purple C4.

What can happen is all those who are Long and hiding below the purple C4 Low think "OOPS!". Longs being closed equals Shorts being opened and wham!

Thoughts please.

cheers theory

Hi Theory

That is the basis of my count on the S&P. I think we may be at the end of the rtb of a 5 so the next c can go back to the start of the wave 1 of this 5 wave move. The recent crop of c4's could be in the 3rd wave and the rtb. The question then is at what level did wave 1 start, is it at 1038.9 with us having just completed the rtb of 5 or is it at 1171.3 with us having just completed the rtb of 5 of 5.
Of course it could be neither and the rtb if it is one may not have finished!
I think it may be the second but until recently thought it was the first!
One thought I have had recently is that identifying conventional correctives is as important as finding the rtb, c4 when putting the larger count into context.

I had this worry in my S&P post on 30th November that c4's only offer protection in the context of the wave to which they belong

'If this is 4 of iii then the previous c4 levels offer no protection as they are in 3 of iii'

I think Tom's idea of a definitive count is to have every wave in context and conforming to the rules

The black notation is my original thought the red is current


Cheers


USD


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2011, 11:57 AM
Post: #3
RE: C4s - can someone check my thoughts?
USD, Thanks for that. Imagine the stress it would put on a count if there was third smaller C4 leading up to the other two - sort of engulfing expanding C4s reading left to right. However, if you were confident they really were C4s, the feedback it gives you is invaluable.

Now for your dilemma............

Black 4 of iii is three but the red a would have to be a five. Why can't you tell which one it is? Smile

I have a similar problem with the Euro/£ count. What if the 8500 8390 8437 8348 8382 ending at a value in the 8330/20s is a five (those values fit very nicely into one of my EWT Impulsive templates).

There are parts of that section which count well and other bits are not so good but no-one appears to be giving it any consideration - it's been rated as zero probability but I think it is distinctly non-zero.

That would make it an A of an irregular 4th since the Price went on to make a higher High. So we could have been in the 4C, following the last Low below 8300 which was only an RTB and not the possible Pivot.

There are just some times when the data is open to more than one interpretation whatever system you are using -that's in addition to the gaps etc....

cheers theory
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2011, 12:18 PM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2011 12:28 PM by upstreamdave.)
Post: #4
RE: C4s - can someone check my thoughts?
(02-06-2011 11:57 AM)theoryman Wrote:  USD, Thanks for that. Imagine the stress it would put on a count if there was third smaller C4 leading up to the other two - sort of engulfing expanding C4s reading left to right. However, if you were confident they really were C4s, the feedback it gives you is invaluable.

Now for your dilemma............

Black 4 of iii is three but the red a would have to be a five. Why can't you tell which one it is? Smile

I have a similar problem with the Euro/£ count. What if the 8500 8390 8437 8348 8382 ending at a value in the 8330/20s is a five (those values fit very nicely into one of my EWT Impulsive templates).

There are parts of that section which count well and other bits are not so good but no-one appears to be giving it any consideration - it's been rated as zero probability but I think it is distinctly non-zero.

That would make it an A of an irregular 4th since the Price went on to make a higher High. So we could have been in the 4C, following the last Low below 8300 which was only an RTB and not the possible Pivot.

There are just some times when the data is open to more than one interpretation whatever system you are using -that's in addition to the gaps etc....

cheers theory

Hi Theory

Remember the conundrum of whether to use futures data. That is when I became unsure of my first count as using IG, Tom's top of 3 was my wave 1 of A of 4 of 3. I think Tom is probably right as the last move up was needed to finish 3 and I also have it as a high from alternative source. I also feel happier with the move since as an rtb topped or about to top.
I am trying to keep an open mind as I am not yet skilled enough to come up with a 'definitive count'. I do find though that making mistakes is at last proving beneficial as I am starting to recognise where I go wrong.

I have the same thoughts on Euro/£. If the low was the rtb then we still have 5 down to come. I expect to have a better idea tomorrow as I think it needs to bounce from here.

Cheers

USD


Cheers


USD
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2011, 02:09 PM
Post: #5
RE: C4s - can someone check my thoughts?
Ah, there are those words again: ‘definitive count’. I wish Tom had never put those words in his e-book. It may be theoretically possible; however the rules of NEWR are few enough, and there are often enough wiggles in most waves, to allow different counts to be seen, while still complying with all the rules.

It seems like most of us are counting from the big picture down. I find I have a strong tendency to ‘count’ what I expect next…until Mr. Market proves the count wrong. I’ve changed, and am trying to consider / maintain several alternative counts. And, I’m trying to look for the wave tendencies to identify why one might be more probable than another…to help build my insight/understanding of the wave tendencies…and eventually higher probability counts.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2011, 02:33 PM
Post: #6
RE: C4s - can someone check my thoughts?
Hi Perry

Totally agree. There is certainly only one definitive count but I don't know if I have it. It comes back to risk/reward and perceived probability. I do think I am getting better at seeing the waves in NEWR terms though and maybe over time things will become clearer

Cheers


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


Forum Jump: