violations of the Elliott rules regarding Ending Diagonals
ED on $RUT - I have been thinking about this last week. In absolute numbers, W5 is indeed larger then W3 by a couple of points. However - 1) it is only by a couple of points, and it occurred in an overheated sector index. 2) and more importantly, it is obvious that %% wise, W5 was a smaller move than W3.
About this 2nd point - During the years when I was a subscriber to EWI, I saw them several times use the percentage comparisons, rather then those in absolute numbers.
This latter point is related to something that Bobcor was arguing off and on for years on this thread - namely, that on a Log chart one should compare structures the way they "are" on that chart, and NOT in their absolute (non-log) values. Looking at the chart of $RUT on a log chart, Wave 5 is clearly smaller than Wave 3.
Some time last year I discussed this with a friend of mine who is a Professor of Math, and who actually wrote a fairly popular book about the markets (will link below). He agreed that Bobcor was right -- which would also mean that some popular charting programs like QCharts are, in fact, mistaken when they use absolute (arithmetic) numbers when comparing structures on Log charts.
amazon.com
For those who insist that we may only compare absolute arithmetic sizes of waves this argument, of course, won't fly.
I see many interesting discussions between Bcrafty, WLD and others... will think things over and maybe add some comments. Right now, just came back home after being snowed in in a ski resort in Vermont - or, maybe more precisely, after being snowed out of NYC. Need to have another beer and take it easy for a while... ;) |
