Latest S & P 500 Count

[theoryman]

(02-17-2012 11:38 AM)Perry Wrote:  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

Hi Perry, I'll have a go!

First I will do it out of the context of the bigger picture.

The appearance of a completed countertrend 1 2 3 A RTB C4 5 on the local scale of 5 ticks or 1 min or 5 min etc... is a signal that we have moved into the final 5th of something in the direction of that trend on that scale.

The level of certainty attached to the move depends on the "clarity" with which you can count - or miscount - each of the moves within it. In my case, I pay particular attention to the A and the C4.

How quickly you can then "know" the move is over, comes with how well you can do that in the 5 on the end of the sequence above. Either you can use its subwave C4 or you have to wait to use the C4 in the sequence above.

Sometimes, the market is very kind and even when you can't get inside that 5, the next move takes out the previous C4 - confirming the 5 is over - and then retraces back to close to where the 5 ended.

If the 5 is over, the whole sequence of 1 2 3 A RTB C4 5 is over. There is only one way that sequence can be countertrend and complete - must itself be a C4 at a higher degree.

So the trend must continue to at least the start of the C4 at the higher degree, which was of course a RTB at the higher degree.

So all you do - out of context of the bigger picture - is to let the trend run to at least to the RTB and then only exit when you pick up the ending pattern and get confirmation the trend is over.

What happens when you take the whole picture into consideration?

If there is a barrier ahead past the RTB, as a result of your big picture count then you have a dilemma; plus a possible source of confirmation bias, since you are expecting the move to finish.

The dilemma is, "How close to the barrier can I let it run if there is no visible ending pattern?" What if the big count is wrong and it's not a barrier at all?

There have been some spectacularly close encounters that I have come across, where it was a barrier but there was no evidence at the local level, to say the trend was going to stop but it did.

There have been some spectacular examples where there was no evidence it was going to stop and it didn't. The bigger picture count was wrong and the "barrier" wasn't a structural one - maybe it might act as a temporary one but not in the longer term.

I now trade with two thoughts in mind and they are built into the plan at the start.

The overall plan assumes the local picture is correct (min reward, max risk and probability of success) but I will exit pdq the moment it is shown to be wrong.

The two thoughts revolve around how minimum the reward will turn out to be!

I am presently swayed towards letting the "now" patterns I can see take a higher priority - as opposed to the presence of a supposed barrier ahead.

The closer I get to the potential barrier the more protective of profit I get but much less so than previously. I tend to trade in fourths when a trend gets going - trade has already paid for itself, left behind the pivot, trailing way off the pace and trailing close up. All I have done is shift the balance between the last two towards a more optimistic way of looking at it - hence get "now" right and let the future look after itself.

cheers theory

[Perry]

Thanks,
Perry

[EW46]

Mr. Hennesy,

Since you are the expert and the SP500 is indeed precarious, could you perhaps give us a hint as to what your wave count is.

I am still a newbie at this form of counting and just recently discovered your free ebook - BTW - big thanks.

EW46

[finster869]

(02-27-2012 02:18 AM)EW46 Wrote:  Mr. Hennesy,

Since you are the expert and the SP500 is indeed precarious, could you perhaps give us a hint as to what your wave count is.

I am still a newbie at this form of counting and just recently discovered your free ebook - BTW - big thanks.

EW46

His long term count was blown with the May 2011 high being taken out today.

[Perry]

EW46,

Hopefully Tom will post a chart with his current count.

Here is what the count currently looks like to me.

   

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.

As finster pointed out, a number of Tom’s counts have been proven wrong. Still, I think this is a method worth learning. As with any TA, it’s not easy. It takes time, skill and judgment. From theoryman’s posts, I believe he is using it to trade successfully.

If you look back through all the posts, you’ll find a number of Tom’s charts which illustrate his counts. I think you’ll also find a lot of info about wave characteristics which can be a help in counting.

Tom included “Achieve Definitive Wave Counts” on the cover of his ebook. If taken too literally, this could lead to disappointment. While definitive counts may be theoretically possible, I think the time, skill, and judgment needed make definitive counts highly improbably (except in hindsight). Having said that; I think making useful counts is possible.

Perry

[theoryman]

(02-29-2012 10:34 PM)Perry Wrote:  EW46,

Hopefully Tom will post a chart with his current count.

Here is what the count currently looks like to me.



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.

As finster pointed out, a number of Tom’s counts have been proven wrong. Still, I think this is a method worth learning. As with any TA, it’s not easy. It takes time, skill and judgment. From theoryman’s posts, I believe he is using it to trade successfully.

If you look back through all the posts, you’ll find a number of Tom’s charts which illustrate his counts. I think you’ll also find a lot of info about wave characteristics which can be a help in counting.

Tom included “Achieve Definitive Wave Counts” on the cover of his ebook. If taken too literally, this could lead to disappointment. While definitive counts may be theoretically possible, I think the time, skill, and judgment needed make definitive counts highly improbably (except in hindsight). Having said that; I think making useful counts is possible.

Perry

Hi Perry,
I don't know if you were a member when I questioned whether the idea could be called a rule or not. In my experience a rule has to work under every condition and be usable by anyone who applies it correctly and give the same result for each person using it.

There is no doubt in my mind that it is a very useful idea but I could not support the suggestion that it is a rule.

I also raised concerns about using it on Indices. On a longterm chart what if the constituents have changed, you are no longer comparing like with like. What about the effect of inflation on sentiment? $1371 on May 2nd doesn't buy as much this week, so maybe the allowable max level should bit higher at $1371 + inflation....?

However, yesterday I used the idea on 1 min and tick level to nail a turning point on the FTSE. I built up a position of three trades for less than a total of 25 points.

Why did I use it? Short term, no gaps, market open, nice clear moves.....

On the S&P there was no short term evidence to support it was going to stop and it didn't.

I seem to remember posting something about getting now right and letting the future look after itself

cheers theory

[finster869]

(03-01-2012 06:19 AM)theoryman Wrote:  

(02-29-2012 10:34 PM)Perry Wrote:  EW46,

Hopefully Tom will post a chart with his current count.

Here is what the count currently looks like to me.



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.

As finster pointed out, a number of Tom’s counts have been proven wrong. Still, I think this is a method worth learning. As with any TA, it’s not easy. It takes time, skill and judgment. From theoryman’s posts, I believe he is using it to trade successfully.

If you look back through all the posts, you’ll find a number of Tom’s charts which illustrate his counts. I think you’ll also find a lot of info about wave characteristics which can be a help in counting.

Tom included “Achieve Definitive Wave Counts” on the cover of his ebook. If taken too literally, this could lead to disappointment. While definitive counts may be theoretically possible, I think the time, skill, and judgment needed make definitive counts highly improbably (except in hindsight). Having said that; I think making useful counts is possible.

Perry

Hi Perry,
I don't know if you were a member when I questioned whether the idea could be called a rule or not. In my experience a rule has to work under every condition and be usable by anyone who applies it correctly and give the same result for each person using it.

There is no doubt in my mind that it is a very useful idea but I could not support the suggestion that it is a rule.

I also raised concerns about using it on Indices. On a longterm chart what if the constituents have changed, you are no longer comparing like with like. What about the effect of inflation on sentiment? $1371 on May 2nd doesn't buy as much this week, so maybe the allowable max level should bit higher at $1371 + inflation....?

However, yesterday I used the idea on 1 min and tick level to nail a turning point on the FTSE. I built up a position of three trades for less than a total of 25 points.

Why did I use it? Short term, no gaps, market open, nice clear moves.....

On the S&P there was no short term evidence to support it was going to stop and it didn't.

I seem to remember posting something about getting now right and letting the future look after itself

cheers theory

Good point, Theory, regarding indexes no longer being apples to apples, as well as the effect of inflation.

Perhaps we should be concentrating on gold instead of the spx. Gold is a constant.

Anybody interest in taking a stab at an updated gold count in the gold thread starting at the Oct 2008 low?

[theoryman]

(03-01-2012 06:38 AM)finster869 Wrote:  

(03-01-2012 06:19 AM)theoryman Wrote:  

(02-29-2012 10:34 PM)Perry Wrote:  EW46,

Hopefully Tom will post a chart with his current count.

Here is what the count currently looks like to me.



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.

As finster pointed out, a number of Tom’s counts have been proven wrong. Still, I think this is a method worth learning. As with any TA, it’s not easy. It takes time, skill and judgment. From theoryman’s posts, I believe he is using it to trade successfully.

If you look back through all the posts, you’ll find a number of Tom’s charts which illustrate his counts. I think you’ll also find a lot of info about wave characteristics which can be a help in counting.

Tom included “Achieve Definitive Wave Counts” on the cover of his ebook. If taken too literally, this could lead to disappointment. While definitive counts may be theoretically possible, I think the time, skill, and judgment needed make definitive counts highly improbably (except in hindsight). Having said that; I think making useful counts is possible.

Perry

Hi Perry,
I don't know if you were a member when I questioned whether the idea could be called a rule or not. In my experience a rule has to work under every condition and be usable by anyone who applies it correctly and give the same result for each person using it.

There is no doubt in my mind that it is a very useful idea but I could not support the suggestion that it is a rule.

I also raised concerns about using it on Indices. On a longterm chart what if the constituents have changed, you are no longer comparing like with like. What about the effect of inflation on sentiment? $1371 on May 2nd doesn't buy as much this week, so maybe the allowable max level should bit higher at $1371 + inflation....?

However, yesterday I used the idea on 1 min and tick level to nail a turning point on the FTSE. I built up a position of three trades for less than a total of 25 points.

Why did I use it? Short term, no gaps, market open, nice clear moves.....

On the S&P there was no short term evidence to support it was going to stop and it didn't.

I seem to remember posting something about getting now right and letting the future look after itself

cheers theory

Good point, Theory, regarding indexes no longer being apples to apples, as well as the effect of inflation.

Perhaps we should be concentrating on gold instead of the spx. Gold is a constant.

Anybody interest in taking a stab at an updated gold count in the gold thread starting at the Oct 2008 low?

finster,
The problem with trading "paper Gold" could be that is controlled by a very few - but powerful - groups and hence it won't lend itself well to EWT.

I feel that major currency pairs offer a much better alternative but then again I would, having found that last Low on the EURGBP, albeit at the second attempt (my usual nail the RTB of the final 5th and not the 5th of the 5th mistake).

cheers theory

[Skookum]

I am new to Elliott wave theory, but am enough of an applied mathematician to be familiar with the Fibonacci sequence and ratios and how prevalent they are in nature.

It appears most EW practitioners focus on short timeframe charts. I assume that is because trades can be placed with less risk on such charts. However, as a position trader, I am interested in the big picture. Based on a monthly chart of $SPX, are we in a bull or bear market right now? I have been assuming we have been in a bear market since fall 2007. An inflation-adjusted version of $SPX shows this clearly, with the bear market beginning in spring 2000. But, a look at the monthly $SPX tells me it is in the 5th wave of an uptrend that began spring 2009 that was within about 4% of its peak (or, the peak could be the high logged on Feb 29). Would that not mean we are at or near the end of a bull market impulse with a correction impending?

My bottom line question: where is the $SPX big picture-wise? Can anyone provide a consensus count on a monthly chart?

Thanks.

Skookum

[finster869]

(03-08-2012 02:32 AM)Skookum Wrote:  I am new to Elliott wave theory, but am enough of an applied mathematician to be familiar with the Fibonacci sequence and ratios and how prevalent they are in nature.

It appears most EW practitioners focus on short timeframe charts. I assume that is because trades can be placed with less risk on such charts. However, as a position trader, I am interested in the big picture. Based on a monthly chart of $SPX, are we in a bull or bear market right now? I have been assuming we have been in a bear market since fall 2007. An inflation-adjusted version of $SPX shows this clearly, with the bear market beginning in spring 2000. But, a look at the monthly $SPX tells me it is in the 5th wave of an uptrend that began spring 2009 that was within about 4% of its peak (or, the peak could be the high logged on Feb 29). Would that not mean we are at or near the end of a bull market impulse with a correction impending?

My bottom line question: where is the $SPX big picture-wise? Can anyone provide a consensus count on a monthly chart?

Thanks.

Skookum

If we can't prove that EW or NEWR works on short term charts (or use it with any sort of reliability), what makes you think it will work on a long term chart? The entire theory is based upon fractals building on top of smaller fractals. It just takes longer on a long term chart than a short term chart to see that the count was wrong.

In any event, in traditionall EW forums there is no consensus. Some have March 2009 as a large degree wave 4 bottom with us now starting a 3rd wave up (1-2, 1-2). Others think we are in a primary wave 2 that won't be proven wrong until the Oct 2007 high gets taken out.