Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jerry Olson who wrote (62867)	1/6/2003 5:25:22 PM
From: At_The_Ask	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

Good calls aren't the issue, incorrect counting is incorrect counting. You've always got a 50-50 chance of being right for the wrong reasons on any call. You just said you were trying to learn ewave and I wished to point out that his counting is either completely wrong or "unorthodox". Maybe it's a "neowave" thing but IMO people should study orthodox wave theory before the more exotic flavors. Aside from looking at a zillion web pages and online counts, the only ewave book I've ever read is "elliot wave theory" by prechter and frost and it works marvelously. It takes a little experience but it's a simple theory and often simple is better when it comes to trading. The free tutorial at EWI is pretty much the same thing as the book. My .02...cheers

To: Jerry Olson who wrote (62867)	1/6/2003 5:46:56 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

i have been reading him for a bit now...he's had some good calls..but has always been of a bearish bent... I might maintain you have a bullish bias. Loading the boat with CSCO MU and MLNM leaps and telling people to average in. Well the initial call was correct. Averaging in was a disaster for those that did not take profits. OJ, I am not trying to be critical,just point out what I believe are biases. Zeev is biased long I think. So are you. I am very biased short (too much so for my own good). Now, what's your take on the $HUI? Thanks M