O.K. Carl, I'd like for you to turn around, face the wall and lift your hands in the air and place them against the wall....lemme find my cat-o'-nine-tails with shards of metal & glass blended in. Wwwwwhiippooowwww!! Take that!! Kkkkkiitttoooowwwwww!! How DARE you come against my read!!......hehehehe.
First to address your problem with my wave 5 from 3/27 to 4/6 scenario. Keep in mind that Wave 1 from Nov. 13th ot Dec. 8th took 16 trading days to span 85 points. Wave 5 in my read took 8 trading days to cover just over half the distance. Not a stretch in my book at all, especially considering wave 5's are notorious for being "truncated." If you look at a 30 minute chart of the action between 3/27 & 4/6, notice that starting from the 3/31 high and the 4/1 low, the remainder of the move fits into a rising wedge topping pattern, something that Elliott Theory says is only seen in 5th or C waves. We know for sure it wasn't a C wave, so it had to be a 5th wave. What you have labled as a 5th wave (the action from 4/16 to 4/22) also narrows into a rising wedge top pattern starting with the 4/21 low and the 4/21 high. But I have this labled as C of B, so it fits perfectly in my read as well. Finally, I've often made the mistake of saying a corrective wave didn't take long enough to complete. REMEMEBER! That was the mistake I just made a couple weeks ago, thinking there was no way the wave 4 correction could have been completed between 3/20 & 3/27 (only 4.5 trading days) when the wave 2 correction took 24 days to complete. All that wave theory holds is that the correct pricing action must be traced out to fulfill the requirements, and if you go back on the 15 or 30 minute chart and review the 3/27 to 4/6 period, you will see that pricing action confirms a 5 wave move (heck it has to do that to even meet your label of it being wave 1).
If you try to guestimate expected durations, you get burned everytime. There are only 2 instances where you can accurately predict how long a wave will take to complete. You can predict how long C will take to complete Based on A (95% of the time, they are nearly identical in duration). You can also predict how long wave 5 will take to complete if the 3rd wave is shorter in duration than the 1st wave. Wave 5 will be the same ratio in duration to 3 as 3 was to 1, so this scenario always leads to a wedge top. For example, if wave 1 takes 10 bars, and wave 3 only takes 5 bars, then wave 5 will only take 2.5 bars to complete. This methodology worked to perfection in predicting the end of the upmove off the 4/16 overnight low into the wedge top on 4/22.
The A = C in duration methodology also casts doubt on the validity of your scenario of 4 of 5 runing run 4/6 to 4/16 for the following reason. I think we both agree that a 5 wave move down ensued from 4/6 at 10am, and lasted 3 days. I'll assume you labeled that "A". Then I'll assume you labeled the ensuing move up to the high on 4/15 as "B". So then, you'd be forced to label the decline to the lows on 4/16 as "C". This only gives you a 1 day C versus a 3 day A, something I've never seen on the thousands of ABC corrections I've studied from the smallest degree to the Supercycle corrections.
So in my mind, these are the main reasons why I couldn't go along with your scenario. The stake in the heart would be the fact that we've closed 3 times now below the all-important 1105 level on the June S&P, putting into motion the Double Top distribution pattern that has built enormous selling pressure into the market, which won't be relieved until the downside targets are met. See "Paradigm Shift" post for targets. This would preclude a large scale B wave rally that is due to come in your read.
Regards,
David |
