Thanks for reminding us of Elliot. Of course he is a great exponent of the fractal nature of the markets. Some love it and some hate it but it is worth learning imo. Yes time and price are irregular but your definition of a cycle is helping you miss the power they have. When cycles act upon one another they contract or expand the oscillation of each cycle. When they conflict they cause noise and when they harmonize the produce trends. It doesn't have to be a perfect sine wave to be a cycle. Noise just tells you to back off to a bigger time frame or noise in a big time frame can be resolved by zooming in to a small time frame. Elliots waves are the effect of cycles. Tough for anyone who wants to learn Elliot in a bear market as it's a lot more complex than in a bull market. Wallace Waves - I like that. It is good when a trader takes an idea and develops it. Stimulation is what I like to see and I am glad I have fired off a few brainwaves for some traders here.
Elliott believed markets had well-defined waves that could be used to predict market direction. He was on the right track and if he would have had access to CVB charts he would have gotten a whole lot closer to being consistent. The number of waves are never consistent but the fact there ARE perfectly definable waves (natural cyclic oscillations) are consistent is key. Time is irregular as it relates specifically to price. Price is irregular as it relates specifically to time. One must eliminate the irregularity . . . introduce volume. Pick the one factor not necessary or directly effecting the production of regular natural cyclic oscillations . . . time. Beautiful explanation of cycles, trends and noise by the way. Personally I have enjoyed this discussion Xspurt. Anytime people with varying viewpoints can talk about a subject and be civil is positive and productive.
Hire someone. It can be a pain in the a$$ sometimes but the end result is a beautiful thing if you have the patience not to kill them.
"I post charts, I fully explain what everything on the chart does, I explain entries & exits and have even posted a full set of rules in other threads that specifically spell out the objective rules that trigger each trade or exit set up. I am one of the few people in this forum that will do that. I do not "elude" to my set-ups, I do not "tease" people about what I do and I try to fully answer all questions that are put to me in regards to my charts. (given time constraints) " P@L i want to compliment you it is mature of you. some traders -my self included- harbor the illusion that somehow they would be harmed if they revel their method. they will say things like "the market will absorb the edge" i know AS A PRINCIPLE that the markets have not and will not change- what some mistake as a change is just the market entering a cycle they are unfamiliar with- therefore the notion that one letting out your setup will have the market absorb it I.E. change the market is preposterous yet i am still reluctant to share it. so i say hats off to you
no, afraid i have to take exception between something, anything that repeats and cycle yes the seasons repeat as does a woman's period and as i pointed out she can stop it if she so chooses the increase/decrease of volume is a direct result of the movement of the price volume follows price; why follow a lagging indicator ? i see people putting an indicator on a chart to show where the H or L will be, but at the next H L the indication is off so they change the indicator, change the cycle since 'that' cycle isn't repeating where it's supposed to, but the new cycle does work until the next H L and so on, and so on, and so on the market goes up and down and repeats that process but i've yet to see any 'cycle' consistently identifying tops and bottoms â except my methods of course : ooops ! of course i don't use cycles
I apologize, the world definition of a cycle is wrong and you are correct. Volume follows price . . . correct. My dog follows me around the yard too but I've yet to correlate that to making me money consistently. (I mean please, that makes as much sense as saying the definition of a cycle is wrong. That is a simple high school math fact). Sorry again but I use a single indicator to confirm those natural cyclic oscillation tops & bottoms, the indicator never changes and a stupid emotionless computer has no problem understanding the objective reasoning and decisions that are created from that fixed single indicator. You don't use cycles . . . I get that. I have always understood that there are many ways to profit in these markets. I respect those that do and their methods. I don't understand gene splicing and 15 years goes it was an impossibility but you won't hear any normal person saying that it isn't possible or that the definition of gene splicing is taking a ginsu knife, cutting 2 blobs of different DNA in two and then sewing a oiece from each back together with #2 thread and any other definition is wrong.
hi P@L in response to you showing your chart and to brake my ridiculous fear of sharing my setup i thought i would just post it this is from today the little blue thing indicates where i picked up the yen today i will not explain it if you are into this type off trading you will figure it out and if not it will be of no use to you please no further question. you have been handed the holy grail i labored on and suffered for