Ok, you missed W-X-Y could also be a 3-3-5, with Y triangle
Technically speaking, in an A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.
A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))
and hence can still be considered as an A-B-C —just nomenclature.
No mate, not "just nomenclature", this is crucial. A wave
C can't be in 3, only Y (as 2nd impulse of a structure) can be in 3, at the same way as 1/3/5 waves can't be in 3.
W/X/Y = a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c OR a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c-d-e OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c-d-e. That's all.
A/B/C = a-b-c/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/w-x-y/1-2-3-4-5. Final 1-2-3-4-5 can be changed with a-b-c-d-e. That's all.
Did you read in the book a C wave can be in a-b-c?
Thus far, it appears the correction from JAN-2021 to MAR-2022 is 3-3-3 structure;
I mean this
https://ibb.co/1ZzG3M4You see this part as a 3-3-3, waves here can be named only w-x-y (double three). Unless you can find a way of counting a 3-3-5, than it would be ok for an a-b-c (also w-x-y, if y triangle).
Assuming this part is a 3-3-3=w-x-y (= A only,
not W), after a following B we need a 5 wave pattern. But the second impulse 20 Oct '21 to 24 Jan '22 is counted in 3. There is something wrong here.
Consider the following timescales...
PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(2) pullback was 261 days.
PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback was 285 days (if now complete).
PRIMARY[4] pullback was 364 days.
Would not expect PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback to last longer than PRIMARY[4] pullback, and so ought to complete by mid-April 2022; and hence would not expect an ongoing sideways correction.
Previously you said:
The Elliott Wave model and projections are indicative of price & structure, not time.
Indeed we don't have fixed laws for the time variable (e.g. "a 3 wave can't be the smallest" is a fixed law), time is quite an "accomodating" concept in the theory. Being 2 an 4 equal in time is not eligible to be a good sign of correct labelling, in my opinion.
See page 230, 217 (II and IV of (III))...
However I think there is something, probably related to the "right look" concept. But that's another story.
Thanks for your efforts and sharing your interpretation
Show Posts
