Post Reply 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2010, 02:17 PM
Post: #11
RE: Triangles
(07-08-2010 09:32 AM)ruby Wrote:  That's like saying it's o.k. to wear clothes on a nude beach.
Most of us just walk around nude to get an even tan - but it's a private beach, and the owner is a nudist. Wink

Learn something new every day!

WOW, how did we get here?


( but of course we don't mind a few extra letters if they don't mind
hearing giggles from the other room )

But then, we would appreciate discretion in not laughing at our mistakes
too so maybe we better not giggle after all.

All in due time - NEWR may be ignored or recognized as is one's pleasure.


TS Hennessy
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2010, 03:09 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2010 03:18 PM by kaori.)
Post: #12
RE: Triangles
[Image: keukeu.png]

Just curiosity Henness, how do you label those waves in W2 an d W4 (plus B and X wave position based for this new ew theory when contracting triangle occures ?

"Learn something new every day!
WOW, how did we get here?"

We get here because Raulph Elliott wrote wave theory 70 years ago, in fact very well working theory - so well in fact, that many has later took some parts of it, modified
and re-published it.

Since then some of indursty hardcore re-search guys has brought more fillings for it like Neely did but basic structure stands still what was written 1937-1945 be Elliott itself.

- Kaori
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2010, 03:26 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2010 03:27 PM by finster869.)
Post: #13
RE: Triangles
Not Tom, but I'll give you my take:

I tried to mark up your chart, but had trouble using microsoft paint. Hopefully it is legible. Basically, from the red b on the left side, I have a 1, 2, 3, a, b, 4, leading to a c where you have e. I then changed your "3" to a 3, a, b, 4, 5 since it was a 5th wave.

Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-09-2010, 08:40 AM
Post: #14
RE: Triangles
[Image: eurodollar+5.png]

Thankx for your response. Spend a moment with your chart yesterday actually, but I have little difficulties to see any particular reason why someone want to change labelling for original theory as it is written and working. All of those pattern are very key part of it to recongice not only via waves but also via EW patterns itself to respond for the question "where we are, what happens as next and why".

Here´s current eurodollar, using of cource R.N Elliott orignal wave theory technique.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-09-2010, 02:46 PM
Post: #15
RE: Triangles
Hey Kaori, have you read and tried to absorb what Tom has written in the book which this whole site is about?

Second have you actually read statistical evidence about the Prechter and other experts and their record of calls which I saw in Wikipedia that they exceed by alot the good ones.

You have a problem with finster trying to show what we see here using new rule and claim it is original theory as written and working.

I have a problem with you challenging anything new and so I say don't jaw about it unless you put the proof right here in front of us.

You have one eur/aud picture labeled with cad/yen and show your own labels. It is afterwards labeled. So what.

Then you jump over to a eur/usd chart. I say if you are out to prove something then stay with just one chart on current work and keep updating it. Soon it will be clear that this original theory is all it needs to be and we can all go home and make lots o' dough.

I suggest you start a new thread for this 'proof of EW theory' since whether you trade successfully in triangles or not there is much more to the set of rules and the charts. Triangles are the easy part imo so just because you label an obvious ending according to the last wave as whatever your choice or rules dictate for you they do not constitute a working theory or system for me.

In other words those choices for your labeling do not mean shit to me.

I stuck up for you earlier and defend your right to label as you please but you seem to want to make a point so make it. Or else it is all BS.

Best of luck in your efforts. You'll need it.

Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2010, 10:51 PM
Post: #16
RE: Triangles
Ahhh, the Passion!

I guess it's fortunate that I wrote this post:

Elliott Wave Theory Not a Theory

before the dogma started and not afterwards.

This is touched upon in that post a little. Also the sub-title of that post
being, "nor is it a Religion!" is appropriate I think.

However you can't top Elliott himself for sub-titles. One of my all time
favorites is the statement directly under the title of "Elliott Wave Principle”.

"When a newly discovered phenomenon is disclosed, self-appointed 'experts' immediately appear."

That is why I believe that RN Elliott would first certify and then
approve of and immediately endorse the New Rule.

( except that were he alive he would have no doubt found it first )


TS Hennessy
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
07-15-2010, 05:32 PM
Post: #17
RE: Triangles
kaori, come back! I loved your "gracy" spelling.
Tom, maybe Elliott would have discovered the new rule, if he were alive, but remember, he was an accountant. I think he may have stuck to all the little patterns and shapes anyway, because they add an artistic touch to an accountant's life.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Forum Jump: