Martin Armstrong Discussion

[Inspiretk]

I cannot find his attempted call on stock peaks.  I recalled he tried to sneak in about 3 times.  But using search, I came up with his call on peak in bond markets:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/the-peak-in-government-a-low-in-interest-rates/

And that was NOT correct.  The peak of interest rate indicated by TLT US bonds, or European bonds was NOT on ANY ECM dates.  Peak for TLT was July 8th, 2016.  He never defined exactly what is "peak of confidence in government" for the ECM in 2015.75, but it's obvious to ANYONE that confidence in government should have been measured by the government bond prices, just like the above link, as he was trying to allude to it as well.  BUT he didn't get the peak of bond prices correct AT ALL, and everybody knows that this would have been the bubble to pop, as the bond bull market has gone on for some 30 years.

Notice his wording in his post that allows him to claim credit, in case he is correct.

bikefront, I kept repeating this.  You MUST "measure" his prediction success SYSTEMATICALLY.
Of course, he "ALLOWS" possibilities, so that he can get everything correct.  What about all the long term forecasts that he claims he can make, and that he claimed he made.
Anyone predicts like he does can get everything correct.  If it's not correct, just say that the alternative scenario has been elected.  But who will be stuck with the trading losses?

Kiwibird, I posted how ECM length canNOT be 8.6 years, because that is simply NOT the right number, according to Armstrong HIMSELF (he posted different dates for 2015.75).  You can scroll back and look at what I posted.  8.6 is a MYTH.  If it's a science, then it is repeatable.  It cannot be 8.615 now, and 8.600 later, and 8.61513, and then 8.59.  According to Armstrong, ECM is accurate to the day.  So 8.6 MUST be accurate within 0.3%.  But it's not.  In fact, it's just whatever closest number that will make the math & dates correct.

Armstrong was right on the interest rate. See America's interest rate chart here: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate
Go to 10 year chart, and you'll see 2015 was the low. It's been going up since 2016.

I didn't look into the bonds, because I don't know where to look to prove/disprove.

[1714237383]

1714237383

[1714237383]

1714237383

[1714237383]

1714237383

[1714237383]

1714237383

[Inspiretk]

Another cryptic blog post by Marty

what EXACTLY does he mean by the greatest trade of the century

to go long NOW?

or to go long after an October crash ?

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/training-tools/is-the-greatest-trade-on-the-century-knocking-on-the-door-yet/

I don't know about the greatest rade of the century, but I focused more on the top part of his post:
"What you want is not to short-term TRADE but to be a position trader. People who try to trade back and forth usually get caught up in emotions and end up losing money. What you want is to POSITION TRADE for the long-haul.  Here is what happens just using the Long-term Reversals only – not even every single one. Sure, you leave some on the table. The important thing is to reduce the number of trades and your confidence will increase and you will actually make more at the end of the day."

That is, be a POSITION TRADER for the long haul.

[Inspiretk]

Just want to clarify on his reader's typo of "hire" as "fire".  The chance of another reader having such flagrant typo (like Armstrong often does), together with the chance of having a super-psychic Armstrong not realizing the typo, and not correcting the typo, but simply sees "fire" as "hire" directly in his super-clairvoyant mind, is essentially zero.  A rare event of 0.01% chance can sometimes happen.  But to have two rare events of 0.01% chance happening at the same time will be 0.0001%, and that's basically impossible.

The alternative and much simpler explanation is simply that Armstrong was typing reader's questions in his mind, and obviously everything is crystal clear to him, since he is composing readers' questions.

It literally took me at least more than 2 minutes to realize that "hire" was mis-typed as "fire".

It's everything that added up, some lies here, some lies there, some mis-forecast here and there, etc.  And then I finally woke up.  And what I should have done all along was simply to test his forecast in a SYSTEMATIC way, and that would have told the story quickly, instead of having me persuading myself that I didn't understand his ECM correctly, or that I didn't subscribe to all of his private offering, etc.

Do you have links to the typo of hire and fire?

[Inspiretk]

Here are the typos.  It has been a long time, and I recalled incorrectly.  It wasn't fire/hire.

It was hire/higher, but this is not from his reader.  Only showed it as an example of his typo ability.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/greenspan-sees-inflation-or-stagflation-there-is-a-difference/
a shortage in supply will result in hire prices

This is not strong evidence for your hire/fire. The User comment said higher.
Armstrong on the other hand, used hire instead of higher. So? Looks like he uses a dictating typer maybe. So instead of Armstrong typing it out, maybe he uses a computer to type it for him.

I noticed Armstrong made a lot of errors with bonds, he uses bunds a lot.

For you to discredit Armstrong on his spelling, that's harsh.

This is the typo that I intended to comment, a typo from his reader:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170725212844/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/qa/what-books-are-there-for-monetary-history/

Keep up the hood work and see you in November.

User typo? Cut and paste? Who knows.

Here is another example of very suspicious reader's comment:
https://web.archive.org/web/20180703163201/http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/basic-concepts/the-path-of-order-rather-than-chaos-lead-to-understanding/
why the Sovereign Debt Crisis will bring Gov. Debt to 0

So what's the chance of another person/reader who writes in this?  When was the last time that you see someone typing hood work instead of good work without realizing the typo in front of you.

What are the chances? Total all the comments, find the errors, and divide it to get the chances. Armstrong posts about 6 posts/day, so the odds are stacked in his favour.

As I said that Armstrong is probably an above-average trader.  So he probably could get things more correct than often, but it's not as he has claimed, "AI computer" that is not biased.  You need to collect Armstrong's specific forecasts to get the actual value from his stuffs.  The problem of being ambiguous is this.  Let's say I open a stock market newsletter.  If I keep the wording ambiguous, and let's say 45% of people traded wrong and 55% of the people traded correctly, due to a combination of my forecast wording and people's innate trading intuition, there will ALWAYS be some percentage of profitable trades from whatever I say.  As long as I can keep the 45% of the losing subscribers to hang on longer, and the drop off rates is less than the incoming rate, then my newsletter business will keep booming.  And since every time the people who lose in trades may not be the same people, it's not really a big problem for the constantly changing 45% of people to hang on.  The only person among all who can always win is the person who is publishing the newsletter.

Nobody is forcing anybody to subscribe to his socrates. Those that do, they will end it if they're not profitable. $15/mth is not expensive anyway. He even gives free accounts for some of his basic pairs. Just make new emails and sign up if you don't want to pay.

These are not 100% correct, just take it with a grain of salt.

Have you signed up to his freebie accounts? It's all computer generated. It looks AI to me. Some of them pretty accurate. Others are not. Focus on position trading, and see how you go using demo accounts.

The honest newsletter writers will post ACTUAL trades and keep a record, because they are actually good, and they have a real winning record to post for everyone to see.  Armstrong has none, and he doesn't keep track.  Again, all he needs to dispel this is to post a trade record in real-time, and shows a good trading profits from it consistently, beating index funds.  As long as it's a winning record, it's good.

I've tracked some of his AI forecast. They are not correct all the time. They even change sometimes!!!

I think if you use it as a snapshot at the time, that's how you see how it's performing. It's not a forecaster, it's just showing what's happening at that moment in time.

[STT]

I dont know about AI exactly but I often notice company news appearing on google or wherever thats been generated by computers.   The paragraphs are filled out by using various formulas that use the company report data and also some TA on the traded stock movements observable on a graph.    Its kind of useful for giving the information in a usable format but also there is no human insight or reaction in that 'news'  
  The best market moves are because humans get panicked and sell too much or get too hyped similarly, however much computers are there trading the fast transactions its usually some understanding of that effect that gives the best edge.
I can remember being amazed by a talking car back in the 1980's (not luxury but a mainstream model) but I dont remember the speech recognition being there, I think it was just giving data via audio which for the time was also impressive to me anyhow

[MA_talk]

To STT,

  typo of "hood work" instead of "good work" was made in the reader's comments, NOT by Armstrong supposedly.  And that's my point.

  Most people will cut & paste over the email/etc, especially when you want to convey exactly what another person said.

  1. How did Armstrong see the typo, and not realizing the typo, if he cut & pasted over?  What is the chance of another person making that typo, AND another human being (Armstrong) not realizing the typo?
  2.  Or alternatively, Armstrong re-typed it???  That doesn't seem likely to me, since probably 99% of the people will cut & paste what others said, to convey exactly what others said.
  3. Or Armstrong made that comment up, and given his constant typo record, he just made another typo, as usual.

  You can choose option #1 to #3.  And that is NOT the only examples that I have found.  For the same thing to happen twice or three times above, I think only #2 or #3 are possible.  Again, why would I re-type something, especially if I want to convey the readers' sentiment?

[MA_talk]

By the way, for computer to speak, speech synthesis is very easy, and I myself tried to do it in 1994, with publicly available open source codes.

Speech recognition is an entirely different matter.

[MA_talk]

And Armstrong did NOT get the interest rate correct.  The lowest was in 2016 July for 30-year US treasury bond.  Please check TLT stock symbol chart.

Or actually, I should say that Armstrong never said that he got that right either, because that date couldn't be mapped to any of his ECM date, and so he didn't make a claim, or else he probably would.

[MA_talk]

To KiwiBird, I appreciate you filling me in with those info on Larry.  I joined this thread not too long ago, and there are 200+ pages, and obviously I didn't scroll back to read any of that.

The way that I first found out about Armstrong was that I did an internet search, and found out that he predicted 1987 crash.  Maybe he really did get it right, as from what you have observed & collected for your evidences.

In any case, the most important thing now is whether he can repeat the one-time wonder on a constant basis.

And as I've said repeatedly, the best way to go about it is to treat this as a scientific problem, formulate your hypothesis, and test your hypothesis scientifically without any bias.  You cannot parse out Armstrong's sentences that work, and ignore the sentences that don't work.  At the minimum, you need to do it methodically.

And we don't need a 100% accuracy prediction to trade profitably.  But we need to know how much trading edge to size our bets.

And nothing that can be based off what has happened (closing prices).  The hypothesis must be about something in the future.  We can't trade the past to make a profit.  We can only trade given a forward expectation.  Translate your hypothesis methodically into buy/sell transactions (on paper or for real).  If you can make a good profit, then PLEASE report it here, and let us know.  If not, let us know too.

I just have issues with taking a sentence here and there from Armstrong.  That's basically going by your personal intuition on top of Armstrong's.  That is not a testable hypothesis.

[sidhujag]

MA, I did actually use a small account with real money to trade using purely Armstrong's predictions. I made a gain of 600% in 2 days before blowing up on a gap that went the wrong way on 0 day SPX options. Each trade was all in. It was excessively stupid, but an interesting experiment nonetheless. Of couse, it would be difficult to ascern validity with such a small amount of time and virtually no risk management. Had I used normal weekly options, I would have ended up with a gain. My own trading style is quite different, and I do not use the indexes.

i can take any strategy mostly and turn it profitable with money management only

[trc4949]

Is Armstrong or his model looking for a crash into November 21st ?  Confused at the current juncture.

[Thekees]

Marty also said the Dax had a bearish monthly at 11868 which we elected now, he says there is a massive gap now till 10400. I just wonder what he means by gap, will it drop to the next level in only 1 time frame, so it should get there by December?

I had asked a similar question a while ago re the DOW to Socrates Support and had a reply (from Erwin I think) regarding the election of Reversals and the time frame.  
His reply: "...If reversals are taken out you don't wait. The rule is, if we close above/below more then 1%, then the market will retrace to the reversal with no time given.
The rule of 3 applies to any reaction in a bear market usually the 3 time units. So if a rally is expected look for 3 time units.  Strong bear market 3 days or weeks. If a market needs to align itself like gold with other cycles it can be 3 quarters or 3 years as in Gold now.."

So the DAX closed 31 Oct at 1144751 and the Monthly Bear was "..1186880. Taking out this area and we have a large GAP down to the 1040000 zone.."
The September close was 1226589 and it closed October at 1144751, more than 1% past the 1186880 Monthly Reversal.  As there is a gap down i would class this as a strong bear market, so the 3 time-unit rally back up to test the reversal would be 3 days or weeks only - then gap down to 10400 by...? That 10400 price in my mind would intercede with TIME, so yes I think the next Time factors Marty mentions are "..We will also see December and February begin to shape up as important turning points which should produce the opposite of each other."

(Where he says "if the reversals are taken out you don't wait" was in relation to my query regarding the the DOW which was in its Bullish Phase Transition.  In that respect, taking out Bullish reversals by more than 1% in that sort of market, you just jump in and don't wait for any retest, because there is unlikely to be one in such a bullish market, and every Time turning point becomes a cycle inversion with new highs each time.)

Thanks Kiwi, this is good to know.

Since the monthly array indicates a high in November it could be likely to be a 3 week rally back up so it can still close bullish on the month?
If it is just 3 days then the Dax will need to rally to the elected reversal on Monday, if it dos not, can we then assume it will be a 3 week retest?

The same should apply now for the EURUSD now the monthly reversal at 1.5530 has been elected, looks like it should be a 3 week rally back up, but I guess the problem we have is that unless Marty indicates there is a gap then we wont know, since for the time being Socrates only gives one reversal, which does not have to be the closest. Also, I read that the 1% rules is not valid if multiple reversals are elected at the same time, so only in the case of the DAX can we now be sure that the 1% rule is likely to take place. 

[Thekees]

I just had a look at the Array of the DAX again, there is also a Directional change for November so I guess anything can happen.
Also for the weekly array, next week is a turning point with a lot of volatility predicted for that week and the two weeks after that and we even have a panic cycle on the 11/26. So much volatility could be an indication for the 13+% drop needed to reach the next monthly reversal.
Lets see what happens, it will interesting to watch for sure.

[sidhujag]

MA, I did actually use a small account with real money to trade using purely Armstrong's predictions. I made a gain of 600% in 2 days before blowing up on a gap that went the wrong way on 0 day SPX options. Each trade was all in. It was excessively stupid, but an interesting experiment nonetheless. Of couse, it would be difficult to ascern validity with such a small amount of time and virtually no risk management. Had I used normal weekly options, I would have ended up with a gain. My own trading style is quite different, and I do not use the indexes.

i can take any strategy mostly and turn it profitable with money management only

To make it without management is far more impressive- but yes, management is part of being a good trader. In fact, one can say that with bad/no management, any strategy can be turned unprofitable.

TRC, why do you say a potential crash then? I think it's just some fundamental stuff based on ECM. There was no Monthly Bearish elected but he said most likely a low next week.

good MM is a prerequisite to any sucessful system what im saying is you had bad MM and got lucky the strategy didnt matter

[trc4949]

I say potential crash because he has written before about nasdaq crash down into the election, then he also talked about the entire cycle inverting and we go DOWN into 2020.  It seems the final verdict is still in play.  This idea of just consolidation now or on to new highs is not settled yet.

Also long term oscilattors such as MACD are turning down now as compared to 2016 election when everything was turning up

and last but not least the number of days from now until November 21 which is the ECM date, is the same number of days from the final high point of the 1929 peak right before a 40% PLUNGE in the DJIA

[Thekees]

I say potential crash because he has written before about nasdaq crash down into the election, then he also talked about the entire cycle inverting and we go DOWN into 2020.  It seems the final verdict is still in play.  This idea of just consolidation now or on to new highs is not settled yet.

Also long term oscilattors such as MACD are turning down now as compared to 2016 election when everything was turning up

and last but not least the number of days from now until November 21 which is the ECM date, is the same number of days from the final high point of the 1929 peak right before a 40% PLUNGE in the DJIA

Maybe, but he also posted

"The number to watch will be 23995 followed by 23340. These are the two important numbers to watch for month end closing. Keep in mind that electing both will point to a Panic to the downside will point to a test of the 21-22000 area. Keep in mind that at year-end, we need a closing above 24720.

So, nothing yet indicates anything serious just yet. A slingshot move would certainly come into play if we get a monthly close below 23995. However, a closing BELOW 22415 at the end of the month will also warn of a decline into November."

We diden´t elect any of these numbers. As he has said before, how fast the reversals are elected also serve as an indication how severe the crash will be.

[The Beast1]

I've been following this thread for a while now and just registered because I needed to rant on this.

Why in God's name did he decide to explain away his incorrect position by posting the DJIA closing numbers in f*cking Euros this past week?

Look at this post:

Here is the Dow Jones Industrial Index in dollars and Euro, While we have had this sell-off and everyone was touting interest rates & trade, it was really about the upcoming elections where the polls project the House will go back to the Democrats. This will only ensure further economic stagnation for the Democrats will do everything in their power to undermine Trump just so they can win back the Presidency in 2020. This enbittered style of politics is just divisive and ensures that the economy will only get worse.

Nonetheless, the market bounced with the Directional Change as it should have. However, the capital flows have swung again. While they turned negative at the top fearing the US elections, the loss of Merkel's CDU and her stepping down as party leader is the prelude to Merkel going out the door. We could even see this develop as soon as December.

Now look at the Dow in Euro compared to dollars. When the dollar perspective looks like a crash, the Euro perspective should a minor correction and support. The question is not how crazy things get in the USA, but how out of the mind things become in Europe in the aftermath of Merkel. Just look at the two charts with a simple uptrend line from the same point, What a difference a currency makes.

WTF?! This makes no bloody sense. You're telling me that I need to start looking at different indices in varying foreign currencies to understand his BS? His stupid trading platform even was calling for a "Waterfall Event"and now it says "Brief Pause". What the hell does that mean?

Marty seriously needs to start using spellcheck.

Someone out there needs to make a counter blog where they post Marty's predictions with a screenshot of the blog post. Then when it doesn't come true, flame the heck out of him for his fake crap.

[Thekees]

I've been following this thread for a while now and just registered because I needed to rant on this.

Why in God's name did he decide to explain away his incorrect position by posting the DJIA closing numbers in f*cking Euros this past week?

Look at this post:

Here is the Dow Jones Industrial Index in dollars and Euro, While we have had this sell-off and everyone was touting interest rates & trade, it was really about the upcoming elections where the polls project the House will go back to the Democrats. This will only ensure further economic stagnation for the Democrats will do everything in their power to undermine Trump just so they can win back the Presidency in 2020. This enbittered style of politics is just divisive and ensures that the economy will only get worse.

Nonetheless, the market bounced with the Directional Change as it should have. However, the capital flows have swung again. While they turned negative at the top fearing the US elections, the loss of Merkel's CDU and her stepping down as party leader is the prelude to Merkel going out the door. We could even see this develop as soon as December.

Now look at the Dow in Euro compared to dollars. When the dollar perspective looks like a crash, the Euro perspective should a minor correction and support. The question is not how crazy things get in the USA, but how out of the mind things become in Europe in the aftermath of Merkel. Just look at the two charts with a simple uptrend line from the same point, What a difference a currency makes.

WTF?! This makes no bloody sense. You're telling me that I need to start looking at different indices in varying foreign currencies to understand his BS? His stupid trading platform even was calling for a "Waterfall Event"and now it says "Brief Pause". What the hell does that mean?

Marty seriously needs to start using spellcheck.

Someone out there needs to make a counter blog where they post Marty's predictions with a screenshot of the blog post. Then when it doesn't come true, flame the heck out of him for his fake crap.

I think this is more of a longer term comment as he says, "we could even see this develop as a soon as December". I think what he is saying here is that there is not a complete meltdown but just a correction which does not mean there will be a new high tomorrow. The weekly array and the elected reversal still point to a low for this week and tomorrow is the ideal turning point. I don´t think he is trying to explain away position, he is trying to point out that there is no sign of a complete meltdown and that we are still in a staging or consolidation phase.

I do agree that he is not clear and i am always going back to re-read his comments to figure out what the hell he means.

[Kiwibird]

Marty also said the Dax had a bearish monthly at 11868 which we elected now, he says there is a massive gap now till 10400. I just wonder what he means by gap, will it drop to the next level in only 1 time frame, so it should get there by December?

I had asked a similar question a while ago re the DOW to Socrates Support and had a reply (from Erwin I think) regarding the election of Reversals and the time frame.  
His reply: "...If reversals are taken out you don't wait. The rule is, if we close above/below more then 1%, then the market will retrace to the reversal with no time given.
The rule of 3 applies to any reaction in a bear market usually the 3 time units. So if a rally is expected look for 3 time units.  Strong bear market 3 days or weeks. If a market needs to align itself like gold with other cycles it can be 3 quarters or 3 years as in Gold now.."

So the DAX closed 31 Oct at 1144751 and the Monthly Bear was "..1186880. Taking out this area and we have a large GAP down to the 1040000 zone.."
The September close was 1226589 and it closed October at 1144751, more than 1% past the 1186880 Monthly Reversal.  As there is a gap down i would class this as a strong bear market, so the 3 time-unit rally back up to test the reversal would be 3 days or weeks only - then gap down to 10400 by...? That 10400 price in my mind would intercede with TIME, so yes I think the next Time factors Marty mentions are "..We will also see December and February begin to shape up as important turning points which should produce the opposite of each other."

(Where he says "if the reversals are taken out you don't wait" was in relation to my query regarding the the DOW which was in its Bullish Phase Transition.  In that respect, taking out Bullish reversals by more than 1% in that sort of market, you just jump in and don't wait for any retest, because there is unlikely to be one in such a bullish market, and every Time turning point becomes a cycle inversion with new highs each time.)

Thanks Kiwi, this is good to know.

Since the monthly array indicates a high in November it could be likely to be a 3 week rally back up so it can still close bullish on the month?
If it is just 3 days then the Dax will need to rally to the elected reversal on Monday, if it dos not, can we then assume it will be a 3 week retest?

The same should apply now for the EURUSD now the monthly reversal at 1.5530 has been elected, looks like it should be a 3 week rally back up, but I guess the problem we have is that unless Marty indicates there is a gap then we wont know, since for the time being Socrates only gives one reversal, which does not have to be the closest. Also, I read that the 1% rules is not valid if multiple reversals are elected at the same time, so only in the case of the DAX can we now be sure that the 1% rule is likely to take place. 

I have the same queries as you based on the time frame of the rallies in a bear market..hindsight will help us test our hypothesis...

I also asked Erwin about Socrates reversal numbers.. I asked are the reversals quoted the 'Major' ones or just the 'next in line' - and he confirmed the written Reversals on the Investor level are the 'next in line'.
Yes it makes it harder when you don't have all the Reversals to hand to see gaps etc, but once the Trader Level comes live, he confirmed that you will be able to subscribe to just one instrument if you wish (i.e. Gold Futures) and get the all the reversals and arrays for just that.  That would be cheaper than paying the much higher subscription rate that gives full access to everything.

[The Beast1]

I've been following this thread for a while now and just registered because I needed to rant on this.

Why in God's name did he decide to explain away his incorrect position by posting the DJIA closing numbers in f*cking Euros this past week?

Look at this post:

Here is the Dow Jones Industrial Index in dollars and Euro, While we have had this sell-off and everyone was touting interest rates & trade, it was really about the upcoming elections where the polls project the House will go back to the Democrats. This will only ensure further economic stagnation for the Democrats will do everything in their power to undermine Trump just so they can win back the Presidency in 2020. This enbittered style of politics is just divisive and ensures that the economy will only get worse.

Nonetheless, the market bounced with the Directional Change as it should have. However, the capital flows have swung again. While they turned negative at the top fearing the US elections, the loss of Merkel's CDU and her stepping down as party leader is the prelude to Merkel going out the door. We could even see this develop as soon as December.

Now look at the Dow in Euro compared to dollars. When the dollar perspective looks like a crash, the Euro perspective should a minor correction and support. The question is not how crazy things get in the USA, but how out of the mind things become in Europe in the aftermath of Merkel. Just look at the two charts with a simple uptrend line from the same point, What a difference a currency makes.

WTF?! This makes no bloody sense. You're telling me that I need to start looking at different indices in varying foreign currencies to understand his BS? His stupid trading platform even was calling for a "Waterfall Event"and now it says "Brief Pause". What the hell does that mean?

Marty seriously needs to start using spellcheck.

Someone out there needs to make a counter blog where they post Marty's predictions with a screenshot of the blog post. Then when it doesn't come true, flame the heck out of him for his fake crap.

I think this is more of a longer term comment as he says, "we could even see this develop as a soon as December". I think what he is saying here is that there is not a complete meltdown but just a correction which does not mean there will be a new high tomorrow. The weekly array and the elected reversal still point to a low for this week and tomorrow is the ideal turning point. I don´t think he is trying to explain away position, he is trying to point out that there is no sign of a complete meltdown and that we are still in a staging or consolidation phase.

I do agree that he is not clear and i am always going back to re-read his comments to figure out what the hell he means.

See that's what drives me nuts. He is never straight forward with a simple: "The market will move to x price here."

It's always "If the dow closes at 25322 then we are electing the weekly bullish. If the dow exceeds 27432 then the bull market will extend into 2020. However if the dow closes below 21375 then we will be in a protracted beer market electing our reversals."

*Dow closes at 25304*

Marty says, "Ah yes, right on target with our arrays and the directional change which we elected. This means the dow will be slightly bullish heading into December blah blah blah".

I used to be a believer, but the more and more I look at it I'm starting to see the cracks in his process. He's the financial equivalent of the farmer's almanac. He'll never give you an exact outcome, but a range and then claim success.

When in reality, he's just really good at writing astrology level financial price movement predictions that are self actualizing.

The fact that people here are trying to decipher his messages for 233 odd pages is a good thing and it has helped me in coming to my own conclusions. He's a good trader, but I would take his writings more seriously if he stopped sniffing his own farts and would be honest about his incorrect calls (which he never is).

I have the same queries as you based on the time frame of the rallies in a bear market..hindsight will help us test our hypothesis...

I also asked Erwin about Socrates reversal numbers.. I asked are the reversals quoted the 'Major' ones or just the 'next in line' - and he confirmed the written Reversals on the Investor level are the 'next in line'.
Yes it makes it harder when you don't have all the Reversals to hand to see gaps etc, but once the Trader Level comes live, he confirmed that you will be able to subscribe to just one instrument if you wish (i.e. Gold Futures) and get the all the reversals and arrays for just that.  That would be cheaper than paying the much higher subscription rate that gives full access to everything.

And here's the other annoyance of mine: why hasn't he released the full trading version yet? He was hyping that thing hard claiming it will be ready in 2014 or 2015 by the end of Q4. Q4 came and went and the announcement of it being ready just magically disappeared. I work in software dev and the fact that it has taken him this long makes me wonder, is it really not ready or is he just using this as a cherry to encourage people to shell out several thousands of dollars for his WEC meet ups?