- Joined
- 20 November 2005
- Posts
- 787
- Reactions
- 92
Its a trading setup.
Like all analysis has a beginning middle and end.
But its not about the analysis although most everyone I know thinks it is.
Watch Radge carefully---you'll learn more from what you dont hear him say!
Cryptic I know but after 15 yrs thats where most of my best info has come from--I urge you all to let the man do his thing and watch BOTH success and failure--- then learn from BOTH
Currently we are seeing trades based on wave 4 setups---to possible wave 5
There are many others like hopping on Wave 3s. Elliotts NOT about picking tops and bottoms but more about "Where a trade is at in its life" in my view anyway
If intersted I can add a couple more as they come up to the mix.
Radge is a far better exponent of E/W than myself I just add mine to the mix.
May well see the difference in result from Pro to apprentice.
It'll be interesting to see who continues to post their calls now they know they'll be tracked.
What would be even more interesting is for some of those (dare I say "skeptics") who use non-EW techniques (triangles, support & resistance, MAs etc) to post their calls, including triggers, stops & targets, like tech/a did with AOE and for a reputable unbiased observer like kennas to track them as well so we can see how the various techniques compare. I wonder if they would be up to the challenge?It'll be interesting to see who continues to post their calls now they know they'll be tracked.
It's a tool to make money, isn't it?But its not about the analysis although most everyone I know thinks it is.
I'm not sure, but it sounds like you're glad kennas has volunteered his time. By working out which ones work and which don't we can go into the WHY with more rigorous analysis.Cryptic I know but after 15 yrs thats where most of my best info has come from--I urge you all to let the man do his thing and watch BOTH success and failure--- then learn from BOTH
This thread isn't about whether TA or FA or whatever works, it's about Elliott Wave. Even if alternatives fail, it doesn't make EW a good strategy by default.Chris45 said:What would be even more interesting is for some of those (dare I say "skeptics") who use non-EW techniques (triangles, support & resistance, MAs etc) to post their calls
What would be even more interesting is for some of those (dare I say "skeptics") who use non-EW techniques (triangles, support & resistance, MAs etc) to post their calls, including triggers, stops & targets, )
Nun, I'm afraid I don't have a bell worth ringing but I am interested in learning about other techniques, especially EOD techniques, and maybe others are as well. I've only seen one of your trades (which unfortunately was deleted) and was impressed! I think you said before that you're not interested in being a teacher and that's unfortunate because I think that you've got knowledge and skills worth teaching as well as a humorous style. With 3,057 posts to your credit I'm afraid I don't have a clue where to look to find the trades you've posted so, since you are one of the few prepared to go public, perhaps you could start a new thread and share your analysis with us. I'm sure I would not be the only one interested ... (and I'm NOT taking the p!ss!)happy to post my entrys/exits/analysis here also if thats what rings your bell BUT its not based on EW so im invading yet another thread with off topic stuff
This thread isn't about whether TA or FA or whatever works, it's about Elliott Wave. Even if alternatives fail, it doesn't make EW a good strategy by default.
It doesn't meet EW requirements on a number of fronts:
1. wave-c is not equal to wave-a
2. The retracement didn't tag the typical retracement zone
3. Time taken to complete wave-4 is too short compared to wave-2.
This all suggests to me that it will be a more complex corrective pattern and should not move to new highs just yet.
Now I could be wrong and it could skip straight higher, but at the end of the day the pattern doesn't fulfill the trade plan requirements so was not a completed setup.
A wolfe wave is like a stunted a-b-c or more like a descending wedge. In this case wave-c is shorter than wave-a giving the wedge appearance. But even then its not quite a perfect example here.
The question is, where is the advantage of trading a perfect wave which follows textbook laws of EW when the risk advantage of doing such may not be as effective or efficient as trading a wedge or something else - considering market structure and other personal particular checks and balances for instance?
Snake
The question is, where is the advantage of trading a perfect wave which follows textbook laws of EW when the risk advantage of doing such may not be as effective or efficient as trading a wedge or something else - considering market structure and other personal particular checks and balances for instance?
Hi Snake, I've spent considerable time on EW in the past & can say its a flawed strategy .
You must be incompetent at using it then? Perhaps try something else?
Stupid comment
Hi Snake, I've spent considerable time on EW in the past & can say its a flawed strategy .
Gee if it worked it would soon bugger its self up anyway as the market self adjusts for any play .
As for Nick I recommend his last book , it's an informative read & well worth buying ( just skip the EW stuff , my opinion ) .
Perhaps context is a better word.Not answering for Nick but considering your own response of "market structure" perhaps that answers it? It's discretionary analysis after all not a system.
Hi,
Someone has given me a copy of Graham Dyer's Newsletter. Graham seems to be using Elliott Wave. Does anyone get the newsletter and is it any good? The one copy I have is very interesting. I know nothing about Elliott Wave. Is there a Elliott Wave for Dummies book or similar?
Thanks for your help.
Rogue Trading
Since the EW'ers have been kind enough to put their live trading calls up, using EW, I'm taken the time to collate them to see how they go.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?