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 : Humble1 and Swing Trading Friends -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dospesos who wrote (31328)

2/2/2019 4:43:45 PM

From: POKERSAM

Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 41018

Dospesos --You are correct that in the early days of EWP that was not a rule. With years of experience applying EW there have been many advancements in understanding. Probably the best example of this is the guideline of alternation between wave two and wave four of an impulse. In the early editions of Prechter's book there was a chapter dedicated to the Rule of Alternation. After year's of experience this was changed by Prechter to the guideline of alternation because there were so many examples where wave two and four did not alternate.
Another example of advancement in the understanding and practice of EW is seen in the fact that Prechter corrects R.N. Elliott himself where experience had shown R.N. to be in error. As you read Prechter's book you will find several instances in the footnotes where Prechter mentions Elliott's thinking and he then states that experience had shown a different take on a certain point. The number of these footnotes grew with each edition.
This advancement and growth only makes sense. It is nonsense to think that every nuance, guideline and rule was laid out perfectly by R,N, Elliott himself or Robert Prechter. Experience in applying the foundation laid by R.N. Elliott over decades by many ardent students has developed many rules and guidelines that Elliott and even Prechter had not uncovered. What you call "the early classic wave writings" are outdated.
It is only reasonable to view the development of EWP in this way.
Prechter himself has in every edition of his book encouraged students to continue to develop EWP especially in the use of mathematics and fibonacci numbers.
I fully expect that in the years to come there will be a refining of today's understanding of all the rules and guidelines that are available in the Elliott Wave Principle.
So when discussing wave B of a running flat the rules are:
Wave B can be any corrective pattern except a triangle.
Wave B must retrace more than 70% of wave A.
Wave B must be less than twice the price movement of wave A.
Wave B has no minimum time constraint but must take less than 10 times that of wave A.

I cannot put a "Period" here because I believe there will be further refinement and understanding. R.N. Elliott was not the final word and neither was Prechter the final word. And of course I do not think I am the final word on Elliott Wave Principle. R.N Elliott laid the foundation in his early writings. Robert Prechter in his many editions continues to advance and spread the understanding. Many students of the principal continue to this day to advance and refine its understanding.