Rorschace is bullshit, just like EW. No strategy is no strategy. Unless there is a backtest of it, this thread will continually waste everybody's time. If there isn't a method to EW then it is really faith based, not factual.
blow quit being a blowhard,you're still wet behind the ears,a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing, stop wasting your high I Q,keep your trap shut and open your eyes and ears,you might learn something you don't know,surprise yourself
Where is the backtest of your emotions? Markets are defined by cycles and patterns. They tend to follow prior support and resistance levels, fibonacci sequences, and fill any prior gaps (above and below). Elliott Wave is not absolute. Tactical analysis (i.e. market timing) involves short term predictive theories based on past price action. The markets are always changing, so the approach must change to adapt to the market. Your post cited below is also just a prediction, just like the ones we're all making as well.
bwolinsky - OK I know that you want to know EW more so much. I don't know a way to convince you that EW is one of the best approaches to use for trading. Do you still keep the link of my blog? Please go there, join the blog, and see my real-time trading for yourself.
I can spot unintentional dishonesty from a mile away. If there was a strategy here, the backtest results would already exist in the thread. Since there is no strategy but guessing, ew exists as fantasy with neither rational nor reasonable basis. You can start defining chart patterns according to your parts of the wave...wait, you can't because there has never been a defined strategy. If there was, you'd be able to tell us what part of a wave is more likely from each point of ew with an accurately calculated backtest. Since no such backtest exists every mindless strategists that tells me there is anything to ew is wasting their breath with me, or else they'd be able to say what the expectancy per trade is whenever they're trading based on ew.
bwolinsky - Sorry that you feel that way. Basically, you are looking for a holy grail that can guarantee you the success of trading. I don't want to disappoint you, but at least I haven't found one before I started trading with EW. Talking about backtesting, I remember that I told you that I have done that long time ago with designing my own trading systems. If you want to pursue that route, good luck to you my friend! I enjoy playing EW and get much more fun from this over system trading.
snowrider, SPX did not close below the Wave top, but simply breached it intraday, do you still consider that as a breach of the original wave count? By the way, futures just opened recently and look weak, ES at 1,289.
ScalperJoe - The price action these days has shown that the market was very weak (and could be continue doing so before some reversal force occurs). It is the Newton's First Law of Motion that can easily explain the market's behavior: "Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it." We shall stay on the bear side until we see a reversal bar. We should not reverse our short position unless a reversal bar tells us otherwise. Also, it really does not matter whether the 1293 is broken or not because the index should not go this deep if it is still a bull market. Trading is an art, and it's hard to explain why. It is like seeing a piece of art work, some people like it but some don't. The following quote is from my blog last Friday: "...The market closed near day low again today, with same trick as what it did everyday in last few days, the market sucked and trapped more bulls (again) in the morning before moving down in the afternoon. The weekly chart closed as a long solid black candle bar - very bearish in long term view. If the current preferred wave count is correct, a 3._3.__3 wave is underway. We will see a big gap down and with a killing collapse very soon (next Monday?). Remember that this bear run is far from over! DO NOT buy into any dip!"
I agree with your logic, however I'm still trying to differentiate between corrective wave patterns within the context of the larger timeframes. If the original Elliott Wave count began with the October 2011 lows, my understanding was the wave count remains intact so long as the TOP of Wave isn't breached, which from a closing basis it wasn't (as of Friday). In other words, could it still be a valid "ABC" corrective pattern, whereby 1,422 is still the top of Wave [III]?