Price rallied higher than expected. So it's time to step back a little and watch the entire decline from the 1.4939 top. I see 2 main possibilities, first a possible bearish triangle wave X where the triangle is finished and the decline should start tomorrow. Second possibility is a corrective wave X that has higher to go.
Monday, August 15, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Jeremy!
ReplyDeleteIt is great getting your studies and ideas.
As far as the 2 scenarios are concerned, I give more chances to a higher X wave. In the triangle scenario I do not like the structure of the second wave and especially the timing which it gets compared to the other 4 waves.
I did not expected the price to go above 1.43 and now wonder if we shall exclude even a 1.5180 scenario.
With best regards and wishes,
Catalin
Hi Catalin,
ReplyDeleteThanks for you comment. In a triangle, there's usually 1 wave that takes more time and is more complex than the others. We'll see what happens. For price to go to 1.50, there would have to be a wave Z of X. It's possible, and it would offer a great selling opportunity, but i have to see before i believe this.
Friendly greetings,
Jeremy
Jeremy,
ReplyDeleteI took the point with the complexity of one of the 5 legs of a triangle.
Thanks for your feed-back.
It is a long time now that I want to thank you for sharing your experience and perspectives. This is a truly formative/ developing experience to me. I've learned from you more than from any other source of study. I feel gifted with your insights.
Thanks!
with best regards,
Catalin
I wonder now if we can see an X wave (from the low of 1.3837) under the shape of a triangle where it already completed the first 3 legs?!
ReplyDeleteIt might therefore explain the boring and limited price action of the last 10 days or so.
Just an idea.
Best regards,
Catalin
Yes that's also possible. 1.4535 is in focus. In my triangle scenario this is the wave C high and wave E cannot go above this level. In your triangle scenario 1.4535 is the wave A high and wave C cannot go above.
ReplyDeleteJeremy