Thank you, MAESTRO. And a Happy New Year to you. We definitely do not trade alike. Besides, those "Fibonacci" lines look like fairly straightforward channel lines. I'm guessing you could have achieved similar performance without those specific Fibonacci values but with something more mundane and generic. I questioned Pabst because I was under the impression, from previous exchanges with him, that he specifically looked at Fib retracements. Perhaps I am mistaken...
Happy New Year to you too! The distance between those lines is calculated using Fibonacci numbers. The middle line is a cubic spline function and the channels are fibs. And no it just looks the same as your normal Bollinger bands or something similar. Those are totally different lines. It's all about probabilities!
It is extremely sad to me that two very intelligent people are unable to devise a test with at least a FFFEEEEWWWWW less flaws. They did a very nice job to a point and then just completely fell off the track. I am not from a math background, although I was a statistics tutor in college. They have 16 ratios all mixed together and some based on price and others on time. You have got to be kidding me!!!!!! If we were looking for acticity in this pool they set up, they intruduce so much mud and unrelated bubbles a great white shark could bite us in the ass and we wouldn't even see it coming. NUTSNEAL
I guess someone needs to develop a work around for the time-price exchange. That would entail chart scaling issues and/or projective geometry. We would then need to edit our list of numbers for probable turning points. Lastly, we would test this on wheat (ancient to present) to establish the presence (or lack thereof) of fibonacci numbers or derivatives. Also to test the validity of the self-fulfillment theory. Fortunately, this has already been done years before my birth and Leonardo of Pisa's as well. I can almost picture Emperor Maurice Tiberius projecting rainfall and the price of wheat and bronze on his Byzantine tablet.