The Elliott Wave debate

[lukeaye]

This is a trade i took, now this charting software which i stated before is crap the price is wrong on rio for this date, but check your own records.

Now this trade i did, i identified using elliot wave theory, an a-b-c correction inside another wave. Now i was away from the computer for a while so i didnt get into the trade as early as i would have liked. but knowing elliots rule, a will be = to c, i took the trade in rio at $68 and closed out at $75.15.

and here are the records to show it. as i said the chart is wrong becuase of this crapy software but check yourself as to the price on those dates.

hopefully i a am no longer an "idiot" and ill take that $500 as well as my $2,500 profit i took.

 

[lukeaye]

Luke




My apologies.
Im confused.




Clearly then you have taken these trades with "other techniques" could you explain these in addition to your labelled charts?

Well it would depend on what im trading, wouldnt it,

My favourite indicators are price time and volume, but i would analyse indistry sectors, commodity prices, what reports are comming out, then if you go to currency you might use stoch or RSI, or support resistance, fib, and certain time cycles, there are heaps that i would use, the more that support what im hypothesising the better i FEEL that it is a good trade.

 

[tech/a]

So you trade on Feel?
Derived by confluence of indicators.
Interesting.
You have the strangest grasp of an ABC correction I have seen.
What is it correcting exactly?

Wouldn't be concerned about your software.
Something else may need attention though.

 

[Boggo]

Some good analysis in these two daily blogs...

http://www.agetblog.com/tradingtechniques/

http://mtpredictor.blogspot.com/

I LIKE TECH/A

More popcorn and back to the lounge for me

 

[lukeaye]

my bad i didnt mean correction, force of habbit saying that, yeah that software is not the greatest.

No its not feel, its analysis using many theories and past and current price patterns, candlestick analysis, etc tried and proven.

you show me your gaurenteed trading strategy though tech.

i have seen nothing but critisim from you so far, show me how great you are.

Im happy for you to show me anything useful. i can sit back and critise quite well.

 

[lukeaye]

price is wrong lol, blame my software

 

[Kryzz]

when did rio hit $75 in the last 6 months?

 

[Trembling Hand]

my bad i didnt mean correction, force of habbit saying that, yeah that software is not the greatest.

No its not feel, its analysis using many theories and past and current price patterns, candlestick analysis, etc tried and proven.

you show me your gaurenteed trading strategy though tech.

i have seen nothing but critisim from you so far, show me how great you are.

Im happy for you to show me anything useful. i can sit back and critise quite well.

Always thought it was wise to do some research before you start lobbing the scuds. :enforcer::screwy:

 

[tech/a]

Its over here.
The one I have made public.

http://www.thechartist.com.au/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm

Techtrader.

You'll need a few weeks to read it all.
You'll need to join.

Enjoy.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

More popcorn and back to the lounge for me

So far as the 'debate' has raged on, I'm yet to understand what the debate is actually about. I thought a debate on a topic was at least 2 sides debating whether the EW principle is firstly: valid (eg 5 waves up 3 waves down in it's basic form) and secondly: if it can be used to predict market action.

Since there have been several good books on EW, I'm kinda expecting those that seem intent on proving EW doesn't exist to provide evidence that a 5/3 structure doesn't exist at all. It's also kinda amusing that many in this forum trade by looking for breakouts or certian patterns that occur, which is exactly what EW teaches.

So far in the context of this 'debate', Boggo's input seems quite reasonable.

 

[tech/a]

if it can be used to predict market action.

Do you think Predict or anticipate?

 

[nunthewiser]

So far in the context of this 'debate', Boggo's input seems quite reasonable.

uh?

showing one winning trade that shows no exit , shows no proof of still holding .......for all we know he sold out for a loss .......

and to be honest i pay no notice to many of the broker statements posted here as it has been shown to be falsified very easily in the past

how about some real time entrys/exits. they speak

and geez . showing 1 winning entry ? from a while back to prove that he used EW ? .........spare me cuz.......... i can post 45 winning entrys to prove i didnt use EW and merely used support resistance bounce trades .

boggo,s input regarding proving EW means squat in my book

no offense boggo but thats my 2 cents as you have had yours in the past

 

[Trembling Hand]

So far as the 'debate' has raged on, I'm yet to understand what the debate is actually about. I thought a debate on a topic was at least 2 sides debating whether the EW principle is firstly: valid (eg 5 waves up 3 waves down in it's basic form) and secondly: if it can be used to predict market action.

Since there have been several good books on EW, I'm kinda expecting those that seem intent on proving EW doesn't exist to provide evidence that a 5/3 structure doesn't exist at all. It's also kinda amusing that many in this forum trade by looking for breakouts or certian patterns that occur, which is exactly what EW teaches.

So far in the context of this 'debate', Boggo's input seems quite reasonable.

OWG glad you dropped in. The discussion is not about "evidence that a 5/3 structure doesn't exist at all". Especially after its played out.

Its about whether its actually used successfully to trade by the gurus that pimp it. Especially the endlessly complex application that seems to be hopelessly lost in the idea rather than the real application.

 

[lukeaye]

Well i have shown three charts which i think have elliot potential, lets see if it plays out.

Im sure there are many more that can be identified. its not rocket science.

 

[tech/a]

Well i have shown three charts which i think have elliot potential, lets see if it plays out.

Im sure there are many more that can be identified. its not rocket science.

Thank God your on our side.

 

[Boggo]

uh?

showing one winning trade that shows no exit , shows no proof of still holding .......for all we know he sold out for a loss .......

and to be honest i pay no notice to many of the broker statements posted here as it has been shown to be falsified very easily in the past

how about some real time entrys/exits. they speak

and geez . showing 1 winning entry ? from a while back to prove that he used EW ? .........spare me cuz.......... i can post 45 winning entrys to prove i didnt use EW and merely used support resistance bounce trades .

boggo,s input regarding proving EW means squat in my book

no offense boggo but thats my 2 cents as you have had yours in the past

You are probably right nun, all this EW stuff is a waste of having to actually do some homework, I am just gonna go long where you see a short from now on

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=472368&postcount=2024

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=472372&postcount=2025

No offense taken nun

 

[tech/a]

OWG glad you dropped in. The discussion is not about "evidence that a 5/3 structure doesn't exist at all". Especially after its played out.

Its about whether its actually used successfully to trade by the gurus that pimp it. Especially the endlessly complex application that seems to be hopelessly lost in the idea rather than the real application.

T/H what exactly do you want to see?
Do you want to see a string of trades with the entry and exits based purely on the wave counts.
Youd have to include fib as they determine likely target areas.

Set the parameters.

 

[nunthewiser]

You are probably right nun, all this EW stuff is a waste of having to actually do some homework, I am just gonna go long where you see a short from now on

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=472368&postcount=2024

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=472372&postcount=2025

No offense taken nun

no i dont think its a waste at all actually , good and bad can be taken from it

if you think going long when i go short is going to work better than your EW , you go for it . i was wrong , woopeee doo.....actually i get it wrong fairly regurly but thats a cross i have to bear

but im not scared to post in real time, right or wrong .i dont wait until hindsight proves im a star to post up my trade ideas/entrys.etc etc

glad you can view things with a bit of humour

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Ah, so it's not about whether EW is valid as a principle TH? Hmmm, the impression I have from you and many others in various threads is that it isn't valid.

So the real question your asking is if it's a valid trading tool? It seems that you haven't looked hard enough, as there's plenty of evidence that it is. Even the EWI website has an extensive video on using EW in Forex trading. As mentioned in numerous posts, EW isn't for everyone!

Need to head back to the micro, need to top up on popcorn. Let me know the final result of this quest.

 

[nunthewiser]

anyways all biitchin aside


how about some LIVE trades posted using your methods of EW in a live trading situation .NOT after and telling us you did it . i mean as you take the trade or asap after and showing your thoughts on the count ,stops, exits etcetcetce

if its too much work thats fine........i dont post charts as i find it too much hassle so do understand .happy to provide entrys and exits as they happen as usual tho