Wave analysis fan club - page 14
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
Val, we practice different schools. Therefore, to understand each other. Give me a graphic, but in words, what can be understood? That you have two or four waves, I don't know... Get the graph...))))
I was just responding to your simple, "Let's talk about the wave better.", "As an example, the markup of the DAILY chart, by Prechter's team." and gave my opinion on Prechter's team's screenshot (and judging by the numbers, it's an index).
And my screenshot here
I just replied to your simple: "Let's talk about the wave.", "As an example, the markup of the DAILY chart, by Prechter's team." and gave my opinion on Prechter's team's screenshot (and judging by the numbers, it's an index).
And my screenshot is here
That's what you mean about Prechter's work, it sure is cool....)))) Yes, it's an index. I've posted it on this site, in the "Trends forecasts...." thread with explanations. Come on, the work of the VA MASTER, let's not discuss, .... here, everything is very simple, either you understand his work, or not....., and right or wrong, it is not for us to judge....)))) not yet mature, and unlikely to grow, to his peaks.....))))
That's what you mean about Prechter's work, that's cool of course....)))) Yeah, it's an index. I've posted it on this site, in the "Trends Forecasts...." thread Let's not discuss the work of the VA MASTER, .... here, it's very simple, either you understand his work or not....., and right or wrong is not for us to judge....)))) We haven't gotten to the top of it yet and we don't think we will......))))
According to the current situation, the current wave down should show it is a four or a b (I think b)
I would like to "outgrow" him (them) (at least try), so I read Elliott (in translation, of course), and he wrote, verbatim, I do not remember, that "Alternation is a law of nature", i.e. there is nowhere without it (alternation).
According to the current situation, the current wave down should show it is a four or a b (I think b)
It's a pleasure talking to you.....)))) Thoughts, worthy of respect. The problem is that if you work "purely" by Elliott, without knowledge of English, it is simply impossible to understand Elliott....)))) What is translated into Russian is ...0......,integer....0...tenths of his theory....)))) Also, his views on VA, scattered over time, through journals, changed and he had far fewer statistics than his followers....))))
It's a pleasure talking to you.....)))) Thoughts, worthy of respect. The problem is that if you work "purely" by Elliott, without knowledge of English, it is simply impossible to understand Elliott....)))) What is translated into Russian is ...0......,integer....0...tenths of his theory....)))) Also, his views on VA, scattered over time, through journals, changed and he had far fewer statistics than his followers....))))
All I can do....)))) Good luck with that....))))
All I can do....)))) Good luck with that....))))
I would like to "outgrow" him (or them) (at least try), so I read Elliott (in translation of course), and he wrote, I do not remember verbatim, that "Sequencing is a law of nature", i.e. there is nowhere without it (sequencing).
That's right, you haven't forgotten. This phenomenon, alternation is not mandatory, but it occurs quite often in Forex. Therefore, the WO gurus, starting with Elliott, recommend to pay more attention to this phenomenon.
It seems that Swannell wrote in his book that according to results of statistical investigations the alternation is not so absolute law. And in the EWA itself, if I remember, interleaving is not an unconditional rule, but only a recommendation that can be violated.
That's right, you haven't forgotten. This phenomenon, alternation is not mandatory, but it occurs quite often in Forex. Therefore, the masters of VaO, starting with Elliott, recommend to pay more attention to this phenomenon.
The thing is that practically all authors (except Elliott) use EWA as a recommendation, and one can often come across phrases like "maybe this way, maybe that way" - it's because the theoretical base is not very well developed, plus the authors try to avoid blaming them for writing something wrong in their books.
Elliott himself wrote that "time, proportions, figure - all three factors are equally important", but what is written in books? 90% - the description of a figure, 8% - ratios and proportions of waves, and 2% - time, and even if there is anything about time at all. As a result, the whole WA is reduced to the search of possible shapes.