Tony, have you ever used/read Zoran Gayer's interpretation of EW? I've just moved to a role where I have come across him and taken onboard his theory which is a hell of a lot more in-depth and complete than anything Prochter/Neely/Frost ever came up with. It actually tackles the realities of using it in real time (the downfall of EW in the usual sense) under a more diverse range of circumstances. I haven't had a chance to test it yet but it looks a lot more useful than typical interpretation which is mostly subjective and can only be used as an "I told you so" look at what has unfolded. PM me if you want to talk about this in a bit more depth
Don't bother, the theory is not testable because it lacks objectivity. The rules are loosely stated and you can pretty much interprete them and the associated "EW guideines" in many different ways with real price charts. As for Zoran he never takes a clear position on the market either up or down. His assessment typically goes something like this "if A occurs price should do this but if B occurs price should do that". In many occasions price does "A" but what Zoran expects based on his understanding of EW does not necessarily follow. In that case he offers an alternate version of what's likely to occur going forward based on the "new" price information. Nothing wrong with that other than to support the un-testability of the theory in an algorithmic framework. In summary these EW characters are a dime a dozen often times providing multiple forecasts based on "alternate counts" to satisfy different possible market outcomes. It's hard to pin them down on anything and in the case of Prechter and Neely I can say with confidence that both are liers with respect to their own account of their historical record of market calls. They both claim they called this or that when in fact they had called it wrong. Most importantly neither of them admit to any wrong calls they made and I personally witnessed both of them making some horrendous calls. The problem is not that they made wrong calls, the problem is that they never admit to wrong calls because their "future" subscriber fees are at risk. So there you have it. EW is many different versions of numerology depending on the practicioner. The best I was able to decipher is that it's mostly a counter-trend approach waiting for one type of "wave" or "wave pattern" to end and a new one to begin. Failures of 3-wave and 5-wave patterns to unfold as expected are always precisely explained after the fact by "extensions" or new "fibbonachi ratios" measured from new "pivots" and other similar tricks of the trade. It's best ignore EW folklore and instead sit down and develop your own testable ideas. Best.
First of all, EW does NOT work. 2nd, it was ''developed'' in theory to ONLY work on the Dow, nowhere else! 3rd, only crooked vendors and other scam artists keep pushing it into other/all markets, trying to scam as many newbies or other losers. 4th, any IDIOT who thinks it works is just that, an idiot. 5th, Anybody who attributes his temporary success to EW, is just temporarily lucky or would have otherwise been profitable without this method. 6th, If it even remotely worked, Prechter wouldn't need his bullshit publishing business and would own the markets by now. It's another STUPID idea for newbies to occupy their time on. 'Been there done that looooong ago. Funny, at this writing the poll is 38% yes and 62% no Elliott, you up there listening?
Agree! It is always best to develope your own ideas rather than adopt someone else's. Probably the best reason why I am successful with EW while many others are not. Appreciate your comments Tony
Good Morning! Personally, I think Ralph is smiling Actually, the Nasdaq is displaying more bullish wave patterns than the Industrials, all through 2002-2005. Thank you for your comments Tony
Any other opinions on the Elliott Wave Theory We still have a few days left in the poll... COMPX, btw, smack in the middle of resistance 2165 - 2185 (2172). Breakout ? or Brickwall? Stock market is not going very far without the Nasdaq...
There is still a few days left in the poll Looks almost like 61.8 % for, 38.2 % against...Fibonacci Updated my blog Tony http://spaces.msn.com/members/caldaroEW/
I don't know ... lost touch with him in 1998 when we disagreed again about the 2000 crash, as we did about the 1987 one.