EURUSD - Trends, Forecasts and Implications (Part 3) - page 188

 
Zet:

There is a high probability that a third one has started.
I do not know very well about wave analysis, but one thing is certain!: There can only be an odd number of waves (between two points) 1,3,5,7,9,11...))) And the sum of impulse and correction waves is always even)))
 
chepikds:
I do not know very well about wave analysis, but one thing is certain! : There can only be an odd number of waves (between two points) 1,3,5,7,9,11...)) And the sum of waves of impulse and correction is always even)))
Interesting... Where does that come from? Personal experience or some other source?
 

chepikds:

You can do it this way too, but it's better using the formula 3+4*n, where n =0,1,2,...

The results are more reliable... ))))

 
Noterday:
I wonder... Where did this come from? Personal experience or some other source?
All together)) This seems to be the foundation on which wave analysis is based))
 
I didn't know about it. I'll check it now =))
 
Zet:

chepikds:

You can do it this way too, but it's better using the formula 3+4*n, where n =0,1,2,...

The results are more reliable... ))))

What does the formula say? It doesn't add up...
 
chepikds:
And what does this formula calculate? Something does not add up for me...


I understand....)))), that's why I recommend that you count by the rules....))))

Very short... Sometimes it is difficult to understand whether it is the impulse of a new trend or part of a zigzag correction of an old trend. Therefore, kol.-n number of waves in the correction should always correspond to - this formula, ie take and count as follows, 3-waves, is, and the movement continues + newly formed 4 waves, and the movement continues, the latter 4 movement * n (as an example, formed two more new price movements, multiply 4 to 2 = 8 and these 8 plus 3 previously formed movements, you get 11 waves, etc.) Thus, in the correction may be only 3,7,11,15, etc. waves. If the number of waves differs from that specified in the formula, you should expect its formation to continue, or consider this structure as a possible impulse.

This, if very, very briefly....)))) I hope I have explained the basis of the formula clearly.

 
Crap, let's do it graphically now =))
 
Zet:


I understand....)))), that's why I recommend counting by the rules....))))

Very short... Sometimes it is difficult to understand whether it is the impulse of a new trend or part of a zigzag correction of an old trend. Therefore, kol.-n number of waves in the correction should always correspond to - this formula, ie take and consider that, 3-waves, are, and the movement continues + newly formed 4 waves, and the movement continues, the latter 4 movement * n (as an example, formed two more new price movements, multiply 4 to 2 = 8 and these 8 plus 3 previously formed movements, you get 11 waves, etc.) Thus, in the correction may be only 3,7,11,15, etc. waves. If the number of waves differs from that specified in the formula, you should expect its formation to continue, or consider this structure as a possible impulse.

This, if very, very briefly....)))) I hope I explained the basis of the formula clearly.

OK, thanks, I'll try to get into it...
 
chepikds:
OK, thanks, I'll try to get into it...


You're welcome....))))

Apparently my fault. Once again, but in a different way. The trend is up. Price is starting to correct. 3-waves in. Is the correction over? Maybe, but the price stubbornly continues to move, forming 1 more wave. After that, we can be sure that correction will continue, at least by 3 waves, and we will definitely receive 7 waves (the formula: 3+4*n=0). After 7 waves, another wave is formed. You calculate that 7 waves are completed + 1 new wave, 8 waves in total. Is it acceptable according to the formula? No (3+4*1(n=1)-new 8-wave = the same 7 waves).

What to wait for and how to proceed? After (n=1)-8-wave, comes (n=2), i.e. 4*2 =8+3=11-waves (formula 3+4*n, where n =2) Conclusion. 8 waves are already formed and we should expect 3 more waves to be =11-waves, and they will be, no doubt about it, etc.

Reason: