Martin Armstrong Discussion

[Jason100]

Gold/Silver ratio daily

Picked the Array from previous post. It seems, The composite picked the high 16', after consecutive rises within the parallel channels, the correction and continuation to higher level. Another high coinciding with Fibonacci level and this is a classic Wedge formation. Last week, price is accelerating towards break and also the uptrend/parallel line.
Now, here it gets interesting. You can see the Volatility on the Array, this makes sense, on the Turn and as it approaches the brake or not(brake up).

I would like to ask if there is a monthly version ? The chart goes to the 70s, with some repeated patterns, coinciding with this particular timing regarding the Economic situation and the past. as you know this ratio is quite important. cheers

https://postimg.cc/Sjcbch8K

https://postimg.cc/1fHxYrvh

[1713306964]

1713306964

[1713306964]

1713306964

[1713306964]

1713306964

[AnonymousCoder]

The Martin Armstrong Gold / Silver Ratio Fallacy

Gold/Silver ratio daily
...

In the video available as part of the Metals Report subscription, Martin Armstrong made a clear statement regarding the significance of the Gold / Silver Ratio with respect to a potential Gold Rally, using Reversals and Forecast Arrays as follows.

To cut a long story short: It is all bullshit, some other wizardry to keep the fools entertained and keep them buying his products. Martin Armstrong said that the Gold/Siver ratio needs to fall below 70 to get a change in trend. The ratio actually dipped below 70 without a precious metal rally after that time, but interestingly, while the Gold price rallied, the ratio then rose steadily up to now between 85 and 90, at the time when we have a significant precious metals rally. To make it clear: This is the opposite effect, and we are trying to derive conclusions from this?

Transcript from Video, made on 2016-07-01:

Now I said before that one of the reasons that we saw for example, that gold was not ready, was simply that this silver gold ratio has been rising. In a bull market, it normally declines which would then show we would then have people buying silver as well as gold. So this is been absent as you can see from effectively 2011. Now we went up and we reached this high in February. Now we have been moving down fairly aggressively but we have still not elected any monthly bearish reversals to say the trend is starting to change. We need that confirmation [shows monthly bearish reversals 7310, 7395, 7026, 6024] and now, what we are really looking at, we have taken out the first two minor ones, we really have to get below this 70 area, and then ultimately we have to take out 6024. But once that begins to develop, now we are looking at a long term change in trend. So this is one of the criteria that we have to look at moving forward. [changes to forecast array] Now let's look at the timing of this. From the February high, we had a directional change in March. That has materialized so far, and we ended up with a bit of a, a major volatility rise here in July. And our next real turning point is coming in August - we can see that we have a bit of a choppy period when we come into the elections through October, that's where we have a panic cycle, and then next January is the biggest turning point. So we may see then a movement down, reaction up, if we get a reaction to the upside in January next year that will probably be it on the gold silver ratio. The real breakout in the middle still appears to be more around 2018.



Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.

Every single defrauded person should report their case, see Where and how to complain

[Jason100]

Gold/Silver ratio daily

Hindsight doesn't count.
Recency bias doesn't count.
Cherry picking doesn't count.
Confirmation bias doesn't count.

All samples from various different market conditions counts. But when that happens, the arrays fail. We've been over this a bunch of times on this forum. You can read up on the several hundred pages to verify. Arrays are trash. Give me 10 trade calls in advance based on Socrates. I guarantee they will not be 100%.

100% bias does not count. this is a fictional number in trading. Trade Management and R:R suffice.

[Alex-11]

Since you appear to be an expert on such things, where exactly is this set of rules laid out?  How about providing a link so we may all benefit.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/models/
most important Timining Paragraph and Models & Methodologies Second Edition

Socrates Pro only
The Socrates Platform User Manual
Top Questions and Misconceptions (Topic 1)

Forecast Arrays  a few blog posts
Understanding Cycles  lots of blog posts.

To simplify things, the focus should be currently on the top row of the monthly arrays and on the highest bar only. Consider turning points and cycle inversions, intraday high/lows and highs/lows on closing basis. Additionally there is the sidway movement and a breakout / decline from it.
There are a lot of other things MA is talking about regarding cycles and arrays, but you have to have a lot of time to study that as well and it makes things more complicated. It's not required to understand turning points. Directional changes and panic cycles can be considered as well, but for the beginning I would ignore them.

[Jason100]

The Martin Armstrong Gold / Silver Ratio Fallacy

Gold/Silver ratio daily
...

In the video available as part of the Metals Report subscription, Martin Armstrong made a clear statement regarding the significance of the Gold / Silver Ratio with respect to a potential Gold Rally, using Reversals and Forecast Arrays as follows.

To cut a long story short: It is all bullshit, some other wizardry to keep the fools entertained and keep them buying his products. Martin Armstrong said that the Gold/Siver ratio needs to fall below 70 to get a change in trend. The ratio actually dipped below 70 without a precious metal rally after that time, but interestingly, while the Gold price rallied, the ratio then rose steadily up to now between 85 and 90, at the time when we have a significant precious metals rally. To make it clear: This is the opposite effect, and we are trying to derive conclusions from this?

Transcript from Video, made on 2016-07-01:

Now I said before that one of the reasons that we saw for example, that gold was not ready, was simply that this silver gold ratio has been rising. In a bull market, it normally declines which would then show we would then have people buying silver as well as gold. So this is been absent as you can see from effectively 2011. Now we went up and we reached this high in February. Now we have been moving down fairly aggressively but we have still not elected any monthly bearish reversals to say the trend is starting to change. We need that confirmation [shows monthly bearish reversals 7310, 7395, 7026, 6024] and now, what we are really looking at, we have taken out the first two minor ones, we really have to get below this 70 area, and then ultimately we have to take out 6024. But once that begins to develop, now we are looking at a long term change in trend. So this is one of the criteria that we have to look at moving forward. [changes to forecast array] Now let's look at the timing of this. From the February high, we had a directional change in March. That has materialized so far, and we ended up with a bit of a, a major volatility rise here in July. And our next real turning point is coming in August - we can see that we have a bit of a choppy period when we come into the elections through October, that's where we have a panic cycle, and then next January is the biggest turning point. So we may see then a movement down, reaction up, if we get a reaction to the upside in January next year that will probably be it on the gold silver ratio. The real breakout in the middle still appears to be more around 2018.


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

See https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

Firstly, thanks for the information, which I did/do not have access to. If there is a Monthly version, reversals could be helpful.

Secondly, Its important to mention, I am not defending Martin on this "Fallacy" accusation, which I find improper, as you are quoting my title, and somehow linking my observations/chart analysis with what Martin has said about the Subject. I mentioned before about the aspect of Respect.
When I really trade on a chart, there are no assumptions or Sayings, Ifs and buts, but a Strict following of rules.

As I started the Subject, and tried to correlate the Array I will put down some further observations on the short time i had. From the first look of it,
the second major Monthly Reversal held ground, and from the Array, the Composite pointed to a correction, not a long term change in trend.

During this G/S ratio correction both metals rallied. From then on, there is actually a longer term consolidation on Gold with historic relevance, the formation of a head and shoulders and very recently a breakout. Gold front run the brake out, but not Silver, ( taking into consideration the economic situation, financial Stress, Treasuries, no Inflation )  leading to the G/S Wedge formation( this is unrealized of course until proven ).

Recently Silver price is catching up. Usually there is an overshoot on such formations, as in this case of the Wedge, until a change in trend.

[MTL4]

To cut a long story short: It is all bullshit, some other wizardry to keep the fools entertained and keep them buying his products. Martin Armstrong said that the Gold/Siver ratio needs to fall below 70 to get a change in trend. The ratio actually dipped below 70 without a precious metal rally after that time, but interestingly, while the Gold price rallied, the ratio then rose steadily up to now between 85 and 90, at the time when we have a significant precious metals rally. To make it clear: This is the opposite effect, and we are trying to derive conclusions from this?

I remember reading about the 70 G\S ratio and thinking the same thing (ie it did go to 64 but who knows, with all these difficult to compile rules maybe it falls under some other exemption which causes it to be negated?!).  The ratio was actually falling while the Jan-June 2016 rally was happening and then rose again when the rally was over so that much makes perfect sense.  You can see the G/S ratio falling again now with PMs making another run (and this time I didn't miss it).  The problem with simply putting out a static number like 70 is that the charts are dynamic and based on sloped support/resistance lines so to me the G/S ratio needs to stay below 81 (currently) to signal a change in trend.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/models/
most important Timining Paragraph and Models & Methodologies Second Edition

Socrates Pro only
The Socrates Platform User Manual
Top Questions and Misconceptions (Topic 1)

Forecast Arrays  a few blog posts
Understanding Cycles  lots of blog posts.

To simplify things, the focus should be currently on the top row of the monthly arrays and on the highest bar only. Consider turning points and cycle inversions, intraday high/lows and highs/lows on closing basis. Additionally there is the sidway movement and a breakout / decline from it.
There are a lot of other things MA is talking about regarding cycles and arrays, but you have to have a lot of time to study that as well and it makes things more complicated. It's not required to understand turning points. Directional changes and panic cycles can be considered as well, but for the beginning I would ignore them.

Alex, I appreciate you posting those manuals, alot more helpful than searching through countless blog posts (hopefully there are no special rules found only there).  

In my analysis I have not see the top row on the array to be particularly helpful.

Take this example.... https://postimg.cc/1fHxYrvh  

You can see the second largest bar on the top row does show the 2016 downward movement well (turned out to be a very substantial PM rally, not sure why MA had a hard time calling that from the array).  Then again the largest bar on the top row occurs in 2018 yet it shows a big nothing burger on the actual market chart.  Looking at the market against the array you can see a G/S ratio peak developing in 2019 quite easily with large volatility and it's also the center of the long-term bars as well which again suggests the 2019 time-frame for a trend to develop.  The markings on the array were done in early 2016 so you can see I had highlighted 2019 for a possible event even back then based strictly on the array itself.  Again in my real world testing the long-term and empirical bars along with directional, panic and volatility have shown to be the most reliable against actual market situations.  The top bar only seems to work when all the stars line up perfectly such as right before the 2008 market crash.  So I guess what I'm saying is that the arrays do appear to have some value but it surprises me that the person who supposedly created them isn't able to read them well.

[Alex-11]

Alex, I appreciate you posting those manuals, alot more helpful than searching through countless blog posts (hopefully there are no special rules found only there).  

I can't rule that out, but if yes, I suppose it would be fine tuning only.

Sometimes I think that it is possible that arrays do not work equally good on all instruments.  That doesn't make it any easier, but MA said this about reversals and I think this could also be  the case with arrays. Although, MA never said that about arrays. It's just something that went through my mind when I saw this (kind of exotic) Gold/Silver ratio array. I've zero experience with the ratio, in general. I say exotic because I've not seen it very often in MA's blog posts.

I find this overlay chart kind of hard to read. Especially because the overlay is not yearly.  I've added the yearly chart from Socrates as my own overlay. To me the first 3 bars look good. there is a turning point (high) in 2016. Then turning point in 2018 appears to be a cycle inversion since 2019 has made already higher highs.
https://i.postimg.cc/7YD7V72R/Auswahl-015.png
At the same time I remember that there is a rule that says not only is the highest bar a potential turning point, but also the lowest. Since 2019 is also kind of the lowest bar for 3 years, I'm not sure if 2019 can also be considered a turning point and the ratio will decline again in 2020 into a 2021 low. I tend to believe that this is the more logical explanation and to me it looks like on your chart this is also what is penciled in. The alternative explanation would be that the cycle inversion continues (ratio rise) and 2021 or even into 2023 (lowest bar).

Another thought is that I would want to verify whether the chart has changed in the meantime since 2016. I guess it has not changed since higher time level arrays are generally more stable then daily's and weekly's, but who knows..

If you use the empirical or long term row to determine highs and lows, as far as I know you are on your own. Meaning I don't remember that MA has ever propagated this kind of usage of the array (as you also pointed out). I don't want to say that it doesn't work because I simply don't know.  But I know that on the yearly level there are not enough samples to test that theory sufficiently. Even with the monthly array one would need a lot of time to build a good track record with a single market instrument. But monthly is still much better then yearly. Since the time levels are fractal (according to MA), the behavior of monthly and yearly should be at least similar if not the same.

In any case, I think there are rules that can be followed to determine turning points despite that there are occasionally unclear situations. Whether those rules work well all of the time and with all instruments is another, different question.  I've seen arrays with turning points that worked well, but I'd also like to analyze more of them.

[Jason100]

This is the chart that goes back to the 70s, which shows some symmetry with the parallel channels, within close angle, and 'corrective'
waves in the middle. the trend stood for more than 10 years, and had a wedge like formation that overshoot quite substantially to the upper channel.
One could look at the economic situation - events at the time for correlations.
On the other hand , the current Wedge has already overshoot and approaching Support. Also hit some Fibonacci level. RSI has a minor break of trend.

https://postimg.cc/vcZKgpd1

[MTL4]

Arrays don't work. We've been over this a bunch of times on the forum. We know those rules already. Peak Composite=low or high on a closing or intra-unit basis. But when they fail, its always because of a Reversal, inversion, misalignment, counter-cycle, and so on. Check a consecutive set of array calls on his blog and you'll see that they are basically just coin flips. This is why Armstrong fans only pick out certain winning calls and ignore the rest of the losing ones. Again, if anyone wants to prove it to be the real thing, make some calls. Armstrong fans tried making calls on this forum, and it failed (remember Gumbi?). It reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEDaCIDvj6I obvious nonsense, but then the guy himself believes in his own nonsense and when put to the test, it fails miserably.

Anyone, make 5 consecutive forecasts. Post when the trade was made, and Socrates' criteria for doing so. Also tell the stop-loss or exit point at the time the forecast was made. 5 isn't really enough but having seen how many times it fails, its more than generous. If all five are correct, I'll change my mind. And if anyone does not want to do that and yet still claim that it works, then know that it is the usual fraud by Armstrong&Co.

Oh, and these arrays being posted, know that they show a lot of what happened IN THE PAST. It changes in accordance to what actually happened. Therefore, any arrays posted must have forecasted calls, NOT HINDSIGHT BIAS. It is nonsense, like I said.

Even if the arrays did work as expected I don't see how anyone could possibly make an actual market call without using TA along with it (MA's reversals are likely built from the support/resistance lines but you don't get to see them visually to make entry/exit points).  I tried to use just the arrays to figure out market directions (daily/weekly) and failed miserably (worse than a coin flip).  What I did find was that there were some patterns on there (which I mentioned above) that could provide insight but all you might get from it would be "watch for a trend change during this time frame".  You can't tell if it's up or down but when you combine it with TA it can be helpful IMHO (without TA it would be completely useless IMHO).

This is the chart that goes back to the 70s, which shows some symmetry with the parallel channels, within close angle, and 'corrective'
waves in the middle. the trend stood for more than 10 years, and had a wedge like formation that overshoot quite substantially to the upper channel.
One could look at the economic situation - events at the time for correlations.
On the other hand , the current Wedge has already overshoot and approaching Support. Also hit some Fibonacci level. RSI has a minor break of trend.

https://postimg.cc/vcZKgpd1

Nice chart, really helps to keep overall perspective on where you are in the market today.  Also yes, it's that overshoot in 2016 that caused the G/S ratio to go down and touch the other side of the channel (it then failed a breakout and stayed in the channel).  If we get a break out to the downside now then there's a very high probability we are looking at yet another large rally coming for PMs.  

[DanB1]

Forcast arrays have clear rules which you can follow.  There are a few situation were it's hard to decide whether it's turning point, cycle inversion or sideways movement, but in general there is not that much ambiguity if you follow all the rules

One of the rules is indeed the 1% rule. Three weeks ago I wrote:

Gold elected the "important" monthly reversal in June. We closed 1,392.08. The Bullish monthly was 1,362.50. (~2,2% above the reversal).
So according to the 1% rule we need to test the 1,362.5 reversal within 3 time frames (3 months, so July, August or September).

At the moment gold is testing 1,500 so it would need to come down ~9%.
I'm hoping it will test 1,362.5 as I would like to buy more but I think it's not reachable.


At this moment Gold is around 1,530.
@Alex-11, Do you still see it testing the reversal at 1,362.50?

Alex-11, can you answer my question about this 1% rule please?

[DanB1]

It's no use talking about reversals, turning point, array's etc when nobody of MA followers can even proof this concept by showing live trades.
Come on, would you go in discussion about what it takes to run a full marathon with somebody that can not even walk?

These clowns here are just keeping everybody busy, 315 pages long, but we already came to the conclusion that MA's system isn't working.
Although Gumbi still makes me laugh (really), telling us how stupid we are and then posting 1 'live' trade according to the reversals and losing money.
Well, we haven't seen Gumbi much since then.

Alex-11, maybe it's now up to you to show us some live trades according to MA's rules.
(Alex-11 will probably say that he does not have to proof or show us anything, which will confirm again our conclusion that nobody can make proper trades using Socrates)

[Jason100]

Even if the arrays did work as expected I don't see how anyone could possibly make an actual market call without using TA along with it (MA's reversals are likely built from the support/resistance lines but you don't get to see them visually to make entry/exit points).  I tried to use just the arrays to figure out market directions (daily/weekly) and failed miserably (worse than a coin flip).  What I did find was that there were some patterns on there (which I mentioned above) that could provide insight but all you might get from it would be "watch for a trend change during this time frame".  You can't tell if it's up or down but when you combine it with TA it can be helpful IMHO (without TA it would be completely useless IMHO).

This is the chart that goes back to the 70s, which shows some symmetry with the parallel channels, within close angle, and 'corrective'
waves in the middle. the trend stood for more than 10 years, and had a wedge like formation that overshoot quite substantially to the upper channel.
One could look at the economic situation - events at the time for correlations.
On the other hand , the current Wedge has already overshoot and approaching Support. Also hit some Fibonacci level. RSI has a minor break of trend.

https://postimg.cc/vcZKgpd1

Nice chart, really helps to keep overall perspective on where you are in the market today.  Also yes, it's that overshoot in 2016 that caused the G/S ratio to go down and touch the other side of the channel (it then failed a breakout and stayed in the channel).  If we get a break out to the downside now then there's a very high probability we are looking at yet another large rally coming for PMs.  

Thanks MTL4. Yes, I agree with you.

[AnonymousCoder]

Major deal in Progress. Forget about Martin Armstrong Reversals, Forecast Arrays, you Chart Porn Practitioners!

https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/why-2019-could-be-uranium-s-break-out-year

https://www.outsiderclub.com/report/2019-nuclear-and-uranium-stocks-6-high-powered-investments/957

It has been in the making for months, but yesterday the low has been put in place finally.


Buy CCJ Cameco and enjoy the ride for months to come.


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.

Every single defrauded person should report their case, see Where and how to complain

[AnonymousCoder]

Major deal in Progress. Forget about Martin Armstrong Reversals, Forecast Arrays, you Chart Porn Practitioners!

https://www.livewiremarkets.com/wires/why-2019-could-be-uranium-s-break-out-year

https://www.outsiderclub.com/report/2019-nuclear-and-uranium-stocks-6-high-powered-investments/957

It has been in the making for months, but yesterday the low has been put in place finally.


Buy CCJ Cameco and enjoy the ride for months to come.

Already up 1.5% since I posted. Yes, this is real-time, and not in hindsight like Socrates.

Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.

Every single defrauded person should report their case, see Where and how to complain

[Indyz]

Must be desparate. Troll army is probably bigger than his subscriber count lol

[MTL4]

Already up 1.5% since I posted. Yes, this is real-time, and not in hindsight like Socrates.

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

See https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

Looks like a good bottom call to me (failed breakout to the downside on an upward channel).  Top looks to be around 14 unless you get a breakout (major breakout would be holding above 16) then definitely a new upward trend with new highs very likely.

Anyone want to start another "Stock Trading" thread under "Economics" for stuff like this because it a big help for other traders to be able to discuss?.....the MA thread is just too easy to lose focus.

[MTL4]

Charts are where it's at. Problem is, people don't know how to conduct TA effectively. I remember some time ago I posted some numbers and criteria to trade them intraday for a week in advance when I first discovered a truly amazing technique (on a different forum) and said it would generate no losses. I was being extremely arrogant and off putting in my manner like a child, and so people went at me of course, saying it wasn't possible. But, it worked and people were amazed and salty. I deleted it all and disappeared, but it would have been impossible to replicate in any case, as I had not revealed the important parts of the system, and never have. Secret techniques, magic numbers, and so on are things I would have written off as nonsense. I independently came to the conclusion that it is real, and reverse engineered it. It does lose, but very rarely, with wins and breakevens at 9X%. However, without an objective system, it is just a coin flip. And that's Armstrong's problem. He keeps changing things around and he ignores the losses.

I missed buying the spike down the the LoD today. My system caught it, off 1 point, but I was eating. Rushed to the laptop when I saw it on my phone but the move already happened :/

I did something similar, reverse engineered it and guess what, scary how well it works.  Not surprisingly I too had to learn to always check my ego at the door when I test things, now I just let the facts speak for themselves. I love hearing how others are killing it in the markets. Trouble I have right now is getting my system to do the searching for me to find the best setups.  I started writing code to do it but I just have too many projects on the go to pull it all off at the moment.  I can trade almost anything effectively now but what I want to develop is a way to quickly locate ones that are way offside and have the most potential to move.  MA appears to have a pretty back track record on calling major tops/bottoms that aren't done in hindsight but I suppose that would make sense if you wanted to be vague enough to always claim you were correct on every situation.  

[Indyz]

I guess I have too much time on my hands.....most of these posts are the same, troll army posts unsubstantiated claims and others negate them.


Some of the posts remind me of an ex who wanted to buy a bizjet (she had just started on some working in some MLM scam (Quikstar or something, I forget)

[Alex-11]

Alex-11, maybe it's now up to you to show us some live trades according to MA's rules.
(Alex-11 will probably say that he does not have to proof or show us anything, which will confirm again our conclusion that nobody can make proper trades using Socrates)

nice one 
well then, if you know that nobody can make proper Socrates trades, then there is no point for me to try to prove it.

...hen posting 1 'live' trade according to the reversals and losing money...

wow, you can judge a trading system by looking at one single trade. awesome!

Alex-11, can you answer my question about this 1% rule please?

I don't know how well the 1% rule works. Not tested it.
I know that the recent Gold rally did work well purely from a reversals point of view. Only 2 daily bearish reversals elected in July, not all 4 bearish.  But lot's of weekly and daily bullish reversals elected.

[Alex-11]

Making a call isn't a big deal. Objectivity will reveal a W/L. Simple. Does it work? Is the question. My testing says no, as well as everybody else on the forum who posted live calls based on them.
I think his point was that so few people stepped up to the challenge of posting live calls because it didn't work. Olgray is posting but it seems to me that he wants to see if it works or not, and is undecided as of now.
If you claim it works, then please post live calls. Otherwise, it just goes into the fortune cookie pile.

for the moment I don't want to say anything more then what I did say.  I know it can be hard to tolerate dissent when it's against an alleged consensus, but I don't think this thread is only about getting all people here on the same page. The title of the thread is not "Martin Armstrong is a fraud or is talking nonsense and if you disagree, then prove your point".

Dan81 seems to claim that 1 loosing trade does proof something. I say that this could  also go to the small bad luck pile.  

If I feel I want to post some live trades, I will do. But until then I still want to be able to comment here in this forum without haveing to justify myself every time why I don't prove that Socrates works.
Meanwhile I'm referring to my post from earlier about the 16 year buy/sell signal study. And yes, I know some of you don't trust the data provided by MA.