Posted Jul 23, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
Gold – It Ain’t Over Until the Fat Lady Sings
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-it-aint-over-until-the-fat-lady-sings/
"Yes, the Benchmarks are the targets for it is never just PRICE; it must also be TIME. These two objectives must be reached, and they are in that report. So do we have the low yet? No. To create the low, the MAJORITY must turn bearish. Their target forecasts will be in the $600–$700 level. The key Weekly Bearish Reversals are 1084 and 1075, followed by 1042 and 1026. We have four Weekly Bearish Reversals providing support before the break at $1,000."


Posted Nov 16, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
Gold in the Wake of Paris
"Although gold made a knee-jerk reaction rally to 1097, at the time of this writing it has fallen back to 1087. We elected one Weekly Bearish at 1084; from the last high, we generated a few more in the 1079 to 1071 area, followed by 1040 and 1026. It is between 1026 and a small gap down to 983, followed by 934 and 885. The horizontal lines are the reversals – red for bearish and green for bullish. There are clusters forming above (resistance) and below (support)."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-in-the-wake-of-paris/


Here is all the evidence that completely destroys your argument you have no clue what you are doing that is the problem... I wonder how they lost anything because we held the key reversals which the market needed to close below to imply a move under $1000 "We have four Weekly Bearish Reversals providing support before the break at $1,000."

How do you know he failed to tell his clients? did you purchase the gold report in 2015? and include the many gold updates provided to clients in your findings? And even if he got this one trade wrong compared to the countless others he got right does that make him a fraud? is this really your argument?

You are simply a ignorant fool who wants to argue one trade... there have been countless trades provided by Armstrong and you can only speak of one trade, your bias is a disgrace.

AnonymousCoder"Quarterly reversal time unit is one quarter. Gold rallied before the quarter was over and no other signal in the opposite direction was available to indicate change of direction.

The time span is 1 to 3 units in time so the quarterly bearish reversal had 1 to 3 quarters before time was up.

Armstrong wrote on his private blog on the first of March our quarterly level of the model generated a bullish reversal at the end of the year reversing its short position and going long. This also signaled that gold would rally from the $1060 area and should test the next bullish reversal at the $1347 level."

Not sure if you are aware or not but you are losing this discussion.  

AnonymousCoder
"Quarterly reversal time unit is one quarter."


So a monthly reversal time unit is one month? 

what is laughable is you think there can be absolute certainty in any trade you make. No investment/trade you will ever make can be 100% certain.

"The election of a Reversal normally indicates that the expected high or low that should unfold could take place in as short a time span as 1 to 3 units of time, be it daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly. Therefore, a low might develop the very next day following the election of a Daily Bearish Reversal or within the next few days. The same is true for all price activity levels."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/the-princeton-models-and-methodologies-a-users-guide/system/

AnonymousCoder
"End of year 2015 we elected a bearish quarterly reversal, right? Total failure. The market rallied."

Since its a quarterly bearish reversal it is a long term sell signal so the market can rally in the short term and that is exactly what happened...

All this talk on your blog about your impressions and interpretations  from reading his public blog and whether Armstrong was bullish or bearish is completely meaningless because you only trade on reversals that is the only thing that can tell you the direction.

So if anyone was trading on anything other than the reversals was bound and deserved to lose because this has been repeated by Armstrong for decades, to only trade the numbers.

I remember the summary analysis being like what you described with very little information but that has changed.

I uploaded a current copper futures summary analysis, see link below. Commentary on reversals are included in this report and turning points(array)
https://imgur.com/a/GrhGH6D

@Traxo


Gold: The Panic Cycle is Here
Posted Jul 20, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
"Gold opened the week in Asia with a bang – down nearly $44 at the low of $1083. This is right on target for our Panic Cycle this week. Gold is sharply declining, it will break the $1,000 level, and then everyone will start to look for $600–$700 area."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-panic-cycle-is-here/

Posted Jul 23, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
Gold – It Ain’t Over Until the Fat Lady Sings
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-it-aint-over-until-the-fat-lady-sings/
"Yes, the Benchmarks are the targets for it is never just PRICE; it must also be TIME. These two objectives must be reached, and they are in that report. So do we have the low yet? No. To create the low, the MAJORITY must turn bearish. Their target forecasts will be in the $600–$700 level. The key Weekly Bearish Reversals are 1084 and 1075, followed by 1042 and 1026. We have four Weekly Bearish Reversals providing support before the break at $1,000."

 you only trade on reversals and we NEVER elected the 2 key weekly bearish reversals at 1042 and 1026, this is irrefutable evidence that completely destroys your argument about a low under $1000. I wonder why this key post was not included?


Posted Aug 1, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
Gold Has NOT Bottomed Yet
"Gold elected a Monthly Bearish Reversal today at 1155. We have some support down at the 1042 level for now.
We will be issuing the update on gold for those who purchased last year’s report by the end of the month to cover the downside. The PRICE objective of breaking $1,000 was not met within that 3 year window so we must look to the Benchmarks as laid out in the International Precious Metals Report(2014)."
 https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-has-not-bottomed-yet/

The problem is you story line does not include the gold report and its many updates and you also didn’t have access to the benchmarks in the  International Precious Metals Report. This is what I mean by incomplete information.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/gold-update-being-emailed-next-week/


Gold – What Now?
Posted Aug 3, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

"Gold elected the Monthly Bearish at 1155 and we did so well below that level, holding the 1084 number both weekly and monthly. Our energy models are turning positive, so it does not appear that we will have major follow-through at this time. When you elect a Bearish Reversal that far from the number, you typically bounce back to retest it before proceeding further."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-what-now-3/


Posted Oct 6, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
Gold & the Dow – Looking Ahead
"In gold, there is nothing to get excited about until you see a weekly closing above 1210. "
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-the-dow-looking-ahead/

Posted Nov 16, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
Gold in the Wake of Paris
"Although gold made a knee-jerk reaction rally to 1097, at the time of this writing it has fallen back to 1087. We elected one Weekly Bearish at 1084; from the last high, we generated a few more in the 1079 to 1071 area, followed by 1040 and 1026. It is between 1026 and a small gap down to 983, followed by 934 and 885. The horizontal lines are the reversals – red for bearish and green for bullish. There are clusters forming above (resistance) and below (support)."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-in-the-wake-of-paris/

Posted Dec 5, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
Gold on the Benchmark
Yes, we reached the first number 1043 in the precise week of the first benchmark. But this is not over until the government sings, not the fat lady.
"We will be also be creating a blog for Socrates next week where we will have a bit more freedom to comment without upsetting those who have been paying for the gold reports."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/qa/gold-on-the-benchmark/



Traxo
"People opened positions based on Martin Armstrong's public blog. And they made incorrect calls... "Gold should make a new low this year. "

well that is their mistake thinking that when Armstrong says Gold should make a new low this year is tradable information because YOU ONLY TRADE ON REVERSALS and everything you have posted has nothing to do with them…
Many reversals were given by Armstrong on his public blog as shown above and that is the only way to trade, BY THE NUMBERS!!!! I don't see a single case where the reversals actually provided a wrong buy/sell signal...

You have failed to add the private blog posts provided by Armstrong which started on March the 1st 2016 on Ask-Socrates.com. Why has it been excluded? Armstrong was constantly updating us on his private blog regarding the metals and instead you are using posts from bitcointalk.org that go into May 2019?


Traxo
"13,000+ followers and his tweets get barely any traction at all. Doesn't take a genius to realize that accounts are either fake, or inactive (apparently that account joined January 2010, so it is also a possibility).
Either way, those follower account give 0 fks about his tweets."

I also recommend you actually go to https://twitter.com/StrongEconomics  and try telling us all again how Armstrong is actively tweeting on twitter... and why you think nobody cares.

Socrates basic service only launched in 2016 and the first private blog post was on the 1st of March 2016. before the release of the basic service it was like trading in the dark relying  on PUBLIC blog posts every so often.

Quote from: realr0ach When gold was $1050 and Martin Armstrong said it was going to "drop below $800 into the abyss"
realr0ach was referring to Armstrong's blog  posted on Dec 18 2015 and there is no mention of a drop below $800 into the abyss. The weekly price targets had initial support at 1158 and 1009
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/gold-into-the-abyss/


The low in December 2015 was around 1045 so are you saying that Armstrong is wrong just because we did not test  support just under 1000?. Based on the reversals we held the yearly bearish reversal at the end of 2015!  
Feb 4, 2016 - Price $1160.00
"The volatility is still insane. Gold should make a new low this year. However, since we DID NOT get the sell signal in gold at year-end, this is the bounce, so do not expect it to be a breakout just yet."

Armstrong said not a breakout just yet implying he  was  bullish long term  and he was right gold did crash and made a low around 1124 in late 2016 but wrong about a new low being formed

 on the 1st of March 2016  on the private blog Armstrong said  "Gold elects Monthly Bullish at $1207 on its way to $1309 March now must simply close above 1347 sustain any hope of continuing this rally now it appears a future quarterly closing below 1130 will warn of a break below 1000."

On  march 30th 2016 Armstrong wrote on his private blog all our long term models still imply that the lift-off is not coming until 2017.

On April the 29th 2016 Armstrong said the most important monthly bullish stands at 1330 and 1360." we closed at the end of July 2016 at the 1357 level.


Therefore nothing can be concluded because your conclusions are based off of incomplete information… how can you use posts from the bitcointalk.org Armstrong forum as proof of anything? Only certain trades were actually possible for example when Armstrong said  "a future quarterly closing below 1130 will warn of a break below 1000" and when he said  "Gold elects Monthly Bullish at $1207 on its way to $1309"  this is tradable information because it is black and white, if this then that.

@AnonymousCoder
f you haven't seen my analysis, it is at Quarterly Superposition Event in Gold 2015


I don't have access to the 2015 gold report and I cannot simply take your word for it.

You should simply focus on the reversals and identify the gaps as potential trading opportunities. You can then look to the array for your ideal exit based on the next turning point. You only need to read the weekly report once a week and the monthly report once a month I don't see the problem unless you are day trading...

If you understand the array and reversals then reading the reports is not always necessary because the reversals provide the best possible map of exactly where support and resistance stands at any given time in the market.


@danb1
"Good luck trading on that kind of information!"

I am telling you that I would never trade on that kind of information because you ONLY trade on REVERSALS!!! You want to anticipate the move but that is your mistake. In fact that trading pattern clearly has not been confirmed we needed to make a temporary high the week of 11/18 and a low the week of 12/02 so what are you even talking about?

What I mean by choppy is there is a directional change in December and January back to back which implies we turn down going into December and then up in January making a new high. You would never trade on the array alone or on the words of Armstrong, this play needs to be confirmed by electing reversals. This is has been your mistake all along.

This was my original post
"The call by Armstrong is for the Dow to make a high In January 2020 in line with the ECM, a high this week(11/18) with a low the week of 12/02 will confirm this, with a drop back going into 2021(2nd quarter)"

I only trade on reversals, nothing else. The reversal system is the very foundation of this model. We elected two daily bullish reversal yesterday so today's move is as expected.

@DanB1
 The play is still on but should be choppy, we have back to back directional changes going into February.

@MTL4
The Socrates premium analysis  does go long or short hypothetically a number of positions based on the election of reversals from the daily to the monthly time level which I believe is the same as the chart you posted for example the Dow premium analysis monthly commentary says "we are currently hypothetically long 4 positions at this particular moment on the monthly level"
 
Armstrong mentioned that phase II of Socrates will add a backtesting feature to see what Socrates wrote on any given day.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/socrates/progress-report-on-socrates-deployment/


I think at this time we just don't have access to the chart which would be very helpful but there is still many other features that need to be added to the pro service

AnonymousCoder
If what you say is actually true and I don't dispute it then the meaning of a period is lost.


Again this is incorrect the period in time is defined by the reversal in question, the period has always been a unit of 3.
The election of a reversal normally indicates that the expected high or low that should unfold  in as short a time span as 1 to 3 units of time, be it daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly

The next monthly bearish reversal was 1.749% away what in the hell are you talking about? Did you think it was going to take until the end of May to test it?


"We recommend to align Reversals with Forecast Arrays to further strengthen your research, identifying potential convergence of time and price." (Socrates user manual)

You don't understand the energy model, you don't understand the array, and you don't understand the reversal system… Period.

AnonymousCoder
"Now we are getting to the next point. You are arguing that the elected reversal, which is not a daily reversal, and which is not a weekly reversal but it is a monthly reversal, we should exit it prematurely after half the period's duration. There is nothing in the Socrates system that indicates such a premature exit."

You just keep making it worse for yourself you are again showing a complete misunderstanding of the reversal system.

I don’t think anyone is going to agree with  you here this is just a misunderstanding on your part, the election of a monthly bearish reversal and market moving to test the next monthly bearish can occur the very next trading day there is no set time period as to how fast it will move towards it and Armstrong has never said anything like what you are describing with the premature exit nonsense.

Just checked and  it was in May 2019 that we tested and penetrated the next monthly bearish reversal point 4211 on wheat futures so it was bearish at the end of April. There were clusters of minor and major  monthly bearish reversals indicating strong levels of support at.
42110
41030
41500
40450
39230

 FROM SOCRATES USER GUIDE "The significance of these gaps lies in the fact that once a Reversal is Elected, the financial instrument has a tendency to test the next Reversal. It may or may not elect that next Reversal, but has a tendency to approach it. Hence, when the gap between two subsequent Reversals is large, the entry of a market position upon election of the first Reversal presents a potentially more favourable risk-reward scenario than when the gap is small. "
"Example of a potentially scenario: "
"a long trade could be entered upon election of the Major Weekly Bullish Reversal with a target price (MIT) of the next subsequent Weekly Bullish Reversal for trade exit."


"On Friday, 2019-04-30 /ZW Wheat Futures definitely elected a Monthly Bearish Reversal, that, if had it been traded for the month, would have produced a loss of 17.4%." https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com/

So are you saying you didn’t enter at the end of April because of 1.79% difference between the reversal elected and the next monthly reversal, which we in fact tested and penetrated in May 2019.  I really can't see the issue here??  we elected a monthly bearish reversal in April 2019 and tested the next in May what is your point?

The election of a reversal implies a move to the second and so on...   You do realize if you went short at the end of April the gap to the next monthly reversal was only 1.79% and once the market tested/penetrated it you would exit if you understood the reversal system, again please read the Socrates user guide!!!!!!!!!!!


A possible change in trend appears due come May in Wheat CBT Futures so be focused. And that’s exactly what happened we changed direction in May after making a new low intraday on the monthly level.
Must be just a coincidence right? and if you look at the monthly array here https://ibb.co/qxrWsNq it shows September as a turning point too which turned out to be a low is that also just a coincidence?

I hope you are listening because we did in fact test and penetrate 421.1 in April which was the 4th monthly bearish reversal. Do you know how the reversal system even works?