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.

Non-Tech : Kirk's Market Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kirk © who wrote (5500)	2/4/2018 11:27:59 AM
From: POKERSAM	2 Recommendations Recommended By Kirk © Rarebird Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 26439

My point was that the wave structure favored the top being in at the close on Friday Jan. 26. The top being in at that point was the odds on favorite by a large margin. It is always about possibilities and probabilities. It is only possible for a top to take place at the end of a five wave impulse. In this particular case it was not only possible but probable. All of the waves needed from 666 were complete at that closing high. Every time we make a trade we are betting with what we perceive to be the best odds. Would I have bet the life of my children that it was the top? NO! Did I go dramatically short betting that the top was in? YES! It is now probable that 2872 was the top. We will probably drop to at least 2839 before we get bounce of 20 points or so. Is there the possibility we will launch to a new high from the current level? YES, but it is highly unlikely. We have so far dropped in three waves. It is probably a 123 of an impulse. There is a possibility it is an ABC, though that is unlikely. There was really no doubt in my mind that 2872 was A top and I would go short prior to the close. The question as to whether or not it was THE top of the Super Cycle wave (I) from 666 had very good odds but was not as certain as that it was A top. The odds will increase if we break 2839 to the downside.