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: Henry J Costanzo who wrote (207482)	12/13/2014 1:25:01 PM
From: POKERSAM	1 Recommendation Recommended By NOW Respond to of 209892

Henry = Sorry my friend, I somehow got the wrong board. Here is my response to you. I know. That's fine. Your count is a possibility. If your green 3 reaches 2170 your count will become probable. Why? At 2170 your green 3 will reach 1.618 times your green 1. Statistics show that 3 equals 1.618 times 1, 83% of the time. Statistics also show the a wave C of a zig zag seldom reaches 1.618 times A. So strong evidence will be available soon that the three waves up from 666 is either an ABC or a 1,2,3. The move from 1074 up will either be too long for a likely C or too short for a likely 3. At the present time that three waves up from 666 can be either one. The ABC that went from 1573 in 2000 down to 666 could be a flat wave a of a larger sideways correction and the three wave up from 666 is an abc of B. OR that ABC ending at 666 could be all of the correction and the three waves up from 666 is a 1,2,3 as you label it. IMO, the market will let us know which is likely correct soon enough. IMO till the market speaks, our difference can only be attributed to our bias due to our view of the fundamentals and other TA evidence, not EWP. At this point, EWP supports both views.

To: Henry J Costanzo who wrote (207482)	12/19/2014 12:53:12 PM
From: pedro_deleon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 209892

OK, Henry ... belatedly noting that you did not intend to post in a different thread a week ago, to which I responded ... and in which you indicated that you would not further respond .... So ... I'll repost the question I raised in the other thread, in your thread .... Henry ... thanks for offering up your reaction to Poker's charts. What if any value do you attach to how the RSI and MACD seem to have done well in historically signaling major turns on his monthly chart? In particular, may I call your attention in to the red and green arrows, and what they appear to suggest. At the very least, they seem to offer up cause for concern to the bulls. Other than your operative count, do you rely on other objective metrics that allow you to dismiss Poker's count, in favor of your own? I use monthlies in my own system, and they seldom seem to be quite enough and so I wonder if quarterly data are needed to properly anticipate these bigger turns. The high monthly RSI has been 'warning' for years already. I know Jack Chan uses both the monthly MACD and a LT trend line in his work with good results, although by no means infallible.