Yesterday, amongst a lot of the stuff that went on, I made the following comments :
--------------------------------------------------
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]" It is so often the fact on this day of the month that direction is not clear until nfp does its thing "[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]" To me, it has more and more the feel of it just testing and retesting some area it just broke out of .......... "[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]" [/highlight][highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]The reason for the confusion is that GJ has a track record of being able to make corrections appear as a new trend, and trends to appear as a correction "[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]-----------------------------------------------------------[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]I am now of the opinion that the correction from 174.8 completed at 163.9. GJ then spent the next few days trying to retest (and broke back into) a rising channel / support area. The spike down during NFP only tested the channel that had been broken back into.[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]Consequently, I doubt that this present uptrend is corrective - as it will continue to appear, even until the end - but is impulsive and may travel to 170 ish first before a pullback, which would probably be limited to 167/168 or so, before it climbs back up to make or marginally exceed the double top. [/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]Assuming the argument is valid, only after making double top/or more will it correct back into the 163/163.5 or so area before it heads up again to 180 or so and then higher.[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]A drop out of 165/166 would negate this view and may suggest [/highlight][highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]a longer term triangle/wedge structure is starting or an eventual deeper correction.[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]Edit - it still comes down to how it opens and whether it can maintain itself over 168.5/7[/highlight]
--------------------------------------------------
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]" It is so often the fact on this day of the month that direction is not clear until nfp does its thing "[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]" To me, it has more and more the feel of it just testing and retesting some area it just broke out of .......... "[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]" [/highlight][highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]The reason for the confusion is that GJ has a track record of being able to make corrections appear as a new trend, and trends to appear as a correction "[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]-----------------------------------------------------------[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249); color:rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif]I am now of the opinion that the correction from 174.8 completed at 163.9. GJ then spent the next few days trying to retest (and broke back into) a rising channel / support area. The spike down during NFP only tested the channel that had been broken back into.[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]Consequently, I doubt that this present uptrend is corrective - as it will continue to appear, even until the end - but is impulsive and may travel to 170 ish first before a pullback, which would probably be limited to 167/168 or so, before it climbs back up to make or marginally exceed the double top. [/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]Assuming the argument is valid, only after making double top/or more will it correct back into the 163/163.5 or so area before it heads up again to 180 or so and then higher.[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]A drop out of 165/166 would negate this view and may suggest [/highlight][highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]a longer term triangle/wedge structure is starting or an eventual deeper correction.[/highlight]
[highlight=rgb(244, 246, 249)]Edit - it still comes down to how it opens and whether it can maintain itself over 168.5/7[/highlight]