The Club! | Page 769 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Help Me Establish The GbpUsd After Dinner Club 40 replies

Attachments: The Club!
Exit Attachments

The Club!

  • #15,361
  • Edited 9:07am Jul 12, 2014 8:55am | Edited 9:07am
Quoting janpec1000
{quote} Yes possible, thats one of reasons why i am staying EU bearish.

I agree with you and the other bears ))
dollar rises

Attached Image
  • #15,362
  • Jul 12, 2014 12:32pm Jul 12, 2014 12:32pm
Quoting CandleStar
A simple question, I am pretty new to EW and still reading a lot. But something came up to my mind and irritates me completely: Although it seems pretty subjective to the EW counter which peaks he/she counts or not I find it really impressive why there has not been a consensus about an uptodate counting sequence at least on a single TF (if for more it is too complicated) which is accepted by everyone to be valid (so that no one is forced to repeat the counting from the stoneage). I mean the whole theory has rules, so after such a long time using...

Hahaha, simple question is good. Do not want to answer your tough questions.


There are some EW programs out. All of them requires you to have profound EW knowledge in order to check the count. Often enough the programs get it completely wrong.

I know that Elliottwave International (Prechter) have developed an own program. They already use it. But so far I have not heard that they are about to give licenses.

I do not know if this program does work good.

Out of various reasons programming such a program is not trivial. One difficultie is the fractal nature of the waves, another one is that often enough the waves are open to multiple interpretations (and one has to simply wait until the picture gets more clear).

In such a program you have to build dozens or hundreds of decision cycles, where each result has to be judged against a probability matrix (e.g. ratio of wave 2 to wave 1; time relationship from wave 2 to wave 1) and so on.

Our eyes and brain are very quick to acknowledge complex structures. But when building such a software you have to tell it what it has to do with each tiny peak and trough.

I am not a programmer. Maybe someone here can chip in and help me to explain why this is such a hard task.


Regarding the consensus:

completely right - it all depends upon how far one goes back. When you look at most EW analysts in the "blogosphere" or most paid services, you will soon notice, that they have no clue about the really long term counts.

A widespread error when novice Elliotticans count is, that they often have only very limited historic data and try to count this. Eventually they get it right by chance, but most likely not.

EWI (Elliottwave International) is the largest independent financial analysis and market forecasting firm in the world, with approximately 100 employees spread throughout the country. They have done heavy work on trying to get the really long term counts straight. From all the Elliott Wave outlets I can only recommend this one in order to get the historic counts. Here you have the biggest chance to get the counts right in the future.

But since EW is no crystal ball, many historic counts are prone to multiple interpretations. Someday we can look at them and say: oh, look, it was just only a correction, no impulse LOL


EW works this way:

social mood drives the markets/price. And social mood can turn on a dime - it does not necessarily need an extrinsic factor to do that.

That means, that when you look at a wave/or combination of waves, you can only say, that the highest probability is so and so, and the alternative is so and so. But as ever: probability is not certainty

So in the end you can be dead wrong. That does not mean that you are a bad Elliottican - it only means, that price took the less probable way.

I am not sure if EW, if correctly applied, is so subjective. Because it is the only form of technical analysis, where you have many RULES and GUIDELINES.

So we have here a high degree of objectivity. But each time, when the waves do not present well, we have to give away some of this objectivity and replace it with our experience, knowledge, gut-feeling etc.

We have to accept, that market movements can not be (completely) described by algorithms. When there would be an algorithm, the markets would immediately stop to work, because all the participants sooner or later would use the same algo, and all were at the same time long, or short.


EW is good for mapping the market (or better its moves). But that comes with a burden: often enough we Elliotticans can get very biased

Out of my view and experience EW works best in combination with other methods. I take the EW count as "rough" idea, and do trade predominantly the supply and demand (via volume analysis).


Hope this helps......
  • #15,363
  • Jul 12, 2014 12:36pm Jul 12, 2014 12:36pm
Quoting Grigoriy
{quote} I agree with you and the other bears )) dollar rises {image}

That is the idea I have too, at the moment. I would love to see a sustained drop (a wave 3 down) now, but my volume analysis does not give a high chance for that. It looks like we have to do more ranging here beforehand, at least that has higher probability.

So your count is my main count right now....
  • #15,364
  • Jul 12, 2014 12:37pm Jul 12, 2014 12:37pm
Quoting janpec1000
{quote} No it cant be done becouse EW theory tries to predict future on simple single TF counting facts, if you want to have proper direction you need to update it it per high and low and you need to have it inter-TF to do so. Only supply and demand counting can provide that, and EW theory does not count that in properly as many times supply and demand zones are not fully triggered by highs and lows that EW theory counts. With that said, this is the factor why i do not follow EW future coutning and rather focous on what market tells right now, where...
  • #15,365
  • Jul 12, 2014 12:39pm Jul 12, 2014 12:39pm
Quoting workingforex
{quote} I am short from 1343 level, one small one. Love reading the thread, always helpful. Keep it up, cheers!

It is not so clear at the moment. Would like to see it more in the 1360 vicinity beforehand
  • #15,366
  • Jul 12, 2014 12:40pm Jul 12, 2014 12:40pm
Quoting Grigoriy
{quote} at the start... targets in the stratosphere ) {image}

nice


would be very supportive for drop in EU
  • #15,367
  • Jul 12, 2014 1:19pm Jul 12, 2014 1:19pm
Thanks for the answers, will try to make something out of it.

But I am not satisfied with the explanations I have to admit.

Either the counting of 5 waves and the ABC corrections are valid under ANY market situation or they are not.

When it comes to historical data there should be a"one and only" legal EW counting path developed by the rules that has been verified by enough EW guys up to let us say the end of last month or at least last year, there should be no longer any interpretations possible.

For the future it is another thing, there interpretations are possible.

Will read a little more
  • #15,368
  • Jul 12, 2014 2:29pm Jul 12, 2014 2:29pm
Quoting workingforex
{quote} I am short from 1343 level, one small one. Love reading the thread, always helpful. Keep it up, cheers!
Do not battle the force of China join the dark side Luke....soon, when the resistance is high.
  • #15,369
  • Jul 12, 2014 2:41pm Jul 12, 2014 2:41pm
Quoting CandleStar
Thanks for the answers, will try to make something out of it. But I am not satisfied with the explanations I have to admit. Either the counting of 5 waves and the ABC corrections are valid under ANY market situation or they are not. When it comes to historical data there should be a"one and only" legal EW counting path developed by the rules that has been verified by enough EW guys up to let us say the end of last month or at least last year, there should be no longer any interpretations possible. For the future it is another thing, there interpretations...
Like i said do count of bounces from sup.dem perspective and you will know where your battle zone will be meet, do not try to predict which supernova will explode at which time becouse you will fail most likely ,or if you want to succeed you will need to be in top 0.1%. Learn sup-dem per TF counts, and it should be ok. I am planing to create some learning site or video soon to explain all that, i dont claim to create warm water but i would say i have came as close to it as possible. I have been developing my system over past year and half extensevely on my own market ideas and thats what it has come down to. It is better than EW i can tell you that for sure and i am not being arogant.
  • #15,370
  • Jul 12, 2014 2:50pm Jul 12, 2014 2:50pm
Quoting janpec1000
{quote} Like i said do count of bounces from sup.dem perspective and you will know where your battle zone will be meet, do not try to predict which supernova will explode at which time becouse you will fail most likely ,or if you want to succeed you will need to be in top 0.1%. Learn sup-dem per TF counts, and it should be ok. I am planing to create some learning site or video soon to explain all that, i dont claim to create warm water but i would say i have came as close to it as possible. I have been developing my system over past year and half...
Sounding extremely good to me.

Please send me a PM if I might overlook your post, I am really curious.
  • #15,371
  • Jul 12, 2014 6:00pm Jul 12, 2014 6:00pm
Quoting CandleStar
{quote} Sounding extremely good to me. Please send me a PM if I might overlook your post, I am really curious.
Not possible i will forget about it tomorrow .
  • #15,372
  • Jul 13, 2014 6:05am Jul 13, 2014 6:05am
Quoting CandleStar
Thanks for the answers, will try to make something out of it. But I am not satisfied with the explanations I have to admit. Either the counting of 5 waves and the ABC corrections are valid under ANY market situation or they are not. When it comes to historical data there should be a"one and only" legal EW counting path developed by the rules that has been verified by enough EW guys up to let us say the end of last month or at least last year, there should be no longer any interpretations possible. For the future it is another thing, there interpretations...

The question to this regard boils down to:

developments/waves are fractal

where do we set the starting points in history?

Which events were the wave 3's, which events were the manic phases (or sucker rallies) (wave 5's)? Alone this simple questions/answers are surly prone to multiple debates.

Secondly: who would be interested in doing this work?

So far EWI has done a huge amount on research to this topic. Do they like to share it or do they like to sell it?

When you are a subscriber of them, even then you do not have regular access to their historic counts. They do publish them every here and then and then you have to dig for them.

But it is as Janpec already said: it is much easier to trade successful the supply and demand than to trade the Elliott Wave, trying to figure out the turning points by fib-relationships.

I think, the best way to use EW is in combination with S/D analysis.

First do the SD analysis, then see, how a count could fit in
  • #15,373
  • Jul 13, 2014 6:10am Jul 13, 2014 6:10am
Quoting janpec1000
{quote} Do not battle the force of China join the dark side Luke....soon, when the resistance is high.

BTW:

Janpec, I love to read your ideas and analysis a lot. And I have seen a lot of very good trades.

Thank you for being around.


I can nt understand why you have only 13 followers


There you have it: the whole vouching/subscribing system in FF means shit......
  • #15,374
  • Jul 13, 2014 6:27am Jul 13, 2014 6:27am
Quoting infinitus
{quote} BTW: Janpec, I love to read your ideas and analysis a lot. And I have seen a lot of very good trades. Thank you for being around. I can nt understand why you have only 13 followers There you have it: the whole vouching/subscribing system in FF means shit......
People rather subscribe to "Honest FX teams" that promise a 570 % return in one month and complacent, bored upper class members that post some fancy charts with the newest Goldman Sachs recommendations or unreal demo account stats, signals with huge hidden draw down and after the facts you do not see how that turned out or they just will not answer Why would one subscribe to real traders just doing their job which includes "not being right" a lot? ^^
Fix up, trade sharp ...
  • #15,375
  • Jul 13, 2014 6:37am Jul 13, 2014 6:37am
Quoting infinitus
{quote} First do the SD analysis, then see, how a count could fit in
Sounds cool to me and seems like a good starting point without reading hundreds of pages with exceptions of exceptions and so on.

S/D departement, start the engine!
  • #15,376
  • Jul 13, 2014 12:03pm Jul 13, 2014 12:03pm
in case you missed this offer last week

http://www.elliottwave.com/club/pro-...spx?code=91218

that will be very good for all trying to learn EW. I think you will also be able to see some monthly counts as well
  • #15,377
  • Jul 13, 2014 12:11pm Jul 13, 2014 12:11pm
the muppets are lead to the slaughterhouse

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg
Goldman Admits Market 40% Overvalued, Economy Slowing, So... Time To Boost The S&P Target To 2050 From 1900
  • #15,378
  • Jul 13, 2014 12:13pm Jul 13, 2014 12:13pm
CandleStar if you need good learning videos on SD then this is the guy:
Inserted Video

He has some nice swearing uputs here and there, reminds me as if Joe Pesci would be teaching us FX.

I do not trade the way he does, but he does have very nice brief explanation of zones. Few things i do very different than him, and i found that those are extremely important:
-Different drawing of supdem zones. The way he draws it its pretty much how indicators draw it and how most people draw SD zones, the problem is that if you draw zones like that you will miss many trades, you will have reduced risk, but you will miss many setups. The way most people draw zones are using top structure of battle zone and then just excluding bottom shadows (for example for supply zone), while actually in most cases thats exactly where price is going to mostly react and turn away from - the excluded area.
http://prntscr.com/42aing

-draw or use supply and demand zone only if it removed at least 1 low or high, if lows held do not trade supply, if highs held do not trade demand
-drawing/ using zones that were before supply zones now turned into demand if broken and vice versa, and also recognizing zones in middle of rallies or dump that serve as base
http://prntscr.com/42ak5n
-trading supply or demand more than one time (fresh) is completly ok as long as it keeps removing highs or lows, showing that its stranght comparing to counter zones is good (nearby area zones against it are weaker).
-if two zones are close to eachother (same type of zones) then move SL above second (higher zone for supply or lower for demand), that way you risk only a bit more but have more protection on position.
  • #15,379
  • Jul 13, 2014 12:13pm Jul 13, 2014 12:13pm
Zerohedge on fire this weekend - so much great articles

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg
Forget Puerto Rico, German Munis Are In Trouble
  • #15,380
  • Jul 13, 2014 12:20pm Jul 13, 2014 12:20pm
Quoting infinitus
in case you missed this offer last week http://www.elliottwave.com/club/pro-...spx?code=91218 that will be very good for all trying to learn EW. I think you will also be able to see some monthly counts as well
I like their current gold count
The world you desire can be won. It exists.. it is real.. it is possible..
7 traders viewing now