Wave analysis - page 15
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Your drawing resembles a 100% fit - everything is arranged along the extremes. That's great - but it's all drawn on history. Anyone can draw anything on history. But how does it work in the real world, on what we do not know?
You don't know Neely's principle.
Let me explain in brief: there is a list of designations of waves (rays of the ZigZag): 5, s5, F3, c3, x:c3, L3, L5, and several figures (a specific combination of consecutive designations).
Each wave (at the top of the ZigZag) is given an allowable notation. Then a figure is highlighted.
The difference between the real and historical - is that at the top of the ZigZag there will be more signs (usually not much). In reality the main problem is more often that no figure fits the designations (than many alternatives); Neely offers his own methods to solve the problem, but for me it is better to change the zigzag, that is why I took DTZZ.
You can look at the last waves, 100% clarity will only come after 3 waves (3 rays of the ZigZag).
What do you mean... Joan of Arc, for example, could.
Visualization and visionary , although they are the same word, they have different meanings.
One doesn't fit the other, but you must be imagining yourself doing visionary work. I just envy you.
Your drawing resembles a 100% fit - everything is arranged along the extrema.
The indicator draws from the extrema. Not my fault, it draws itself :).
The indicator draws from the extremes. Not my fault, it draws itself :).
It's resisting, you bastard!
Very simple:
1. The figure is completed (usually (9 out of 10 cases) indexes L3, L5 at the end of it). The first new figure wave has an impulse structure (index 5), entry on correction.
2. Two timeframes that go in a row T1, T2 (T1<T2); let a figure with an upward direction go on T2. The question is: where does the corrective wave in this figure end? The answer is the same place where the Neely figure on T1 ends. There is also an upward entry point.
You probably know that you can already open a position for several billions of dollars from home with one button (leverage 1:100), so intraday trading, MTS (except scalper ones) is unlikely to bring consistent profits. But H1, H4, D1 timeframes have become more correct and it is enough to look a couple of times a day to understand how to trade.
Regarding MTC by Neely - I'll think about it, as the 100% formalisation of the Neely breakdown of the ZigZag is coded.
Yep...So many new things to learn. About waves, buttons and in general...
Gentlemen... Gentlemen! We have the grail!
You, as if not to offend, my dear man, to whom are you trying - let me choose a word - to explain your explanations? A hairdresser? A waiter? We're not kids here.
I have nothing to add to what I wrote in my previous posts. And you have nothing to show for it.
Yeah... How much you learn. About waves and buttons and all...
Gentlemen... Gentlemen! We have the grail!
Who are you trying to explain your explanations to (let me choose a word for it)? The hairdresser? A waiter? These are not children here.
I have nothing to add to what I wrote in my previous posts. And you have nothing to show for it.
If he's so smart, why isn't he in the Canary Islands?
The indicator draws from the extremes. Not my fault, it draws itself :).
>> get the turkey in the studio! I want to play too!If he's so clever, why isn't he in the Canaries?
Maybe he's in the Canary Islands. Lots of money, lots of free time, so... It's better than getting stoned or gutting...
If clarity comes in 3 waves, then how can we trade on the real when there is no such clarity?
If clarity comes in 3 waves, then how can you trade on the real, when there is no clarity?
I've talked about this in almost every post. Read Neely's book, then ask questions.