Analysis

[RyNinDaCleM]

If all the EW theorists turn bearish that might be considered a good reason to go long.

Not quite the same as overwhelming sentiment, though.
Besides, most aren't so bearish. luc isn't... It's me and a few others. Far from "all"

[1715285963]

1715285963

[1715285963]

1715285963

[1715285963]

1715285963

[windjc]

If your analysis turns out right (which I give a slightly higher probability than masterlucs scenario) and 'A' reaches $110 to $65 where do you see 'C'? ~$20 to $10?

I will try to see how low it can possibly go without invalidating the entire wavecount. But maybe A and C would be a double bottom or very close. I dont think there is so much room downward under 70 before it would invalidate. I have to sleep now but i can try tomorrow to make a guesstimate on tima and amplitude of C.

Also, you have an A lasting two years. How long of a B and C are we talking about here? Isnt it 61% time frame on these too? So a 5 year bear market minimum and we aren't quite 2 years in?

[Eivind Nag]

If your analysis turns out right (which I give a slightly higher probability than masterlucs scenario) and 'A' reaches $110 to $65 where do you see 'C'? ~$20 to $10?

I will try to see how low it can possibly go without invalidating the entire wavecount. But maybe A and C would be a double bottom or very close. I dont think there is so much room downward under 70 before it would invalidate. I have to sleep now but i can try tomorrow to make a guesstimate on tima and amplitude of C.

Also, you have an A lasting two years. How long of a B and C are we talking about here? Isnt it 61% time frame on these too? So a 5 year bear market minimum and we aren't quite 2 years in?

It just occurred to me that there is a third alternative which is much less bearish, at least when it comes to time. I will create an image later but basically if we mix my count and master lucs into one we got a third option. Master Lucs A is correct (where my 1 is), but he mislabeled his C and i'm right that its a 3.
That means that we are actually on the way to C now in a 5 wave move down from B. That would mean that C would be reached around december / january.

It would also mean, like you point out, that the bear market would have lasted 2 years or 24 months. The 5 wave rise to 1163 took more or less 39 months. 39 x 0.618 = 24.1.

One more thing that points towards this count is the shape of the last wave 2. The fall from 32 to 2.2 has similarities to the current wave 2. That correction ended in a swift double bottom. The current shape and count could easily mimic that correction.

There is no way of knowing which count is correct for sure until we reach the next bottom and see which way the impulses point afterwards.

[klee]

This whole EW stuff looks extremely subjective to me, that's why I avoid using it.

I prefer momentum stuff (P&F) & classical TA (RSI, Bollinger, etc).

But I always find it weirdly addictive to read EW analysis  

[BldSwtTrs]

If your analysis turns out right (which I give a slightly higher probability than masterlucs scenario) and 'A' reaches $110 to $65 where do you see 'C'? ~$20 to $10?

I will try to see how low it can possibly go without invalidating the entire wavecount. But maybe A and C would be a double bottom or very close. I dont think there is so much room downward under 70 before it would invalidate. I have to sleep now but i can try tomorrow to make a guesstimate on tima and amplitude of C.

Wave 2 has no invalidation except a move below the beginning of wave 1. In this case, that would be a price of $.05 from the Gox chart in 2010. Since this is extremely unlikely, it is all a waiting game.

For the record, I agree 90% in your analysis. The other 10% is only that I don't think your 1 was a 1. I do have a count where that same leading diagonal is drawn but is a wave A. Even if that means it was A of an even larger A that we are waiting to complete. Or the other possibility that we are in a triple zigzag. Either way, I have had the belief that we will see LL's (with double digits likely) before we see ATH's for many months now. I can only show my PoV so many times before it becomes boarder line spam. Everyone here knows my stance on this.

RyN, I think you talk about this count that you posted: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=274613.msg11887151#msg11887151

In the scenario where Eivind's 1 would be an A, then where would be the end of your B? At 318$? Or would we still be in that B now?

[Tzupy]

If your analysis turns out right (which I give a slightly higher probability than masterlucs scenario) and 'A' reaches $110 to $65 where do you see 'C'? ~$20 to $10?

I will try to see how low it can possibly go without invalidating the entire wavecount. But maybe A and C would be a double bottom or very close. I dont think there is so much room downward under 70 before it would invalidate. I have to sleep now but i can try tomorrow to make a guesstimate on tima and amplitude of C.

Wave 2 has no invalidation except a move below the beginning of wave 1. In this case, that would be a price of $.05 from the Gox chart in 2010. Since this is extremely unlikely, it is all a waiting game.

For the record, I agree 90% in your analysis. The other 10% is only that I don't think your 1 was a 1. I do have a count where that same leading diagonal is drawn but is a wave A. Even if that means it was A of an even larger A that we are waiting to complete. Or the other possibility that we are in a triple zigzag. Either way, I have had the belief that we will see LL's (with double digits likely) before we see ATH's for many months now. I can only show my PoV so many times before it becomes boarder line spam. Everyone here knows my stance on this.

RyN, I think you talk about this count that you posted: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=274613.msg11887151#msg11887151

In the scenario where Eivind's 1 would be an A, then where would be the end of your B? At 318$? Or would we still be in that B now?

If we still were in that B now, then price should reach about 600$, but IMO that scenario has been invalidated by the deep correction at the end of August.

[BldSwtTrs]

If your analysis turns out right (which I give a slightly higher probability than masterlucs scenario) and 'A' reaches $110 to $65 where do you see 'C'? ~$20 to $10?

I will try to see how low it can possibly go without invalidating the entire wavecount. But maybe A and C would be a double bottom or very close. I dont think there is so much room downward under 70 before it would invalidate. I have to sleep now but i can try tomorrow to make a guesstimate on tima and amplitude of C.

Wave 2 has no invalidation except a move below the beginning of wave 1. In this case, that would be a price of $.05 from the Gox chart in 2010. Since this is extremely unlikely, it is all a waiting game.

For the record, I agree 90% in your analysis. The other 10% is only that I don't think your 1 was a 1. I do have a count where that same leading diagonal is drawn but is a wave A. Even if that means it was A of an even larger A that we are waiting to complete. Or the other possibility that we are in a triple zigzag. Either way, I have had the belief that we will see LL's (with double digits likely) before we see ATH's for many months now. I can only show my PoV so many times before it becomes boarder line spam. Everyone here knows my stance on this.

RyN, I think you talk about this count that you posted: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=274613.msg11887151#msg11887151

In the scenario where Eivind's 1 would be an A, then where would be the end of your B? At 318$? Or would we still be in that B now?

If we still were in that B now, then price should reach about 600$, but IMO that scenario has been invalidated by the deep correction at the end of August.

So that's mean that if the move from 1160$ to 152$ is an A, we are now in the C, right?

[Tzupy]

...
So that's mean that if the move from 1160$ to 152$ is an A, we are now in the C, right?

If we just experienced a truncated B, then yes. But this is not my most probable scenario. I believe we've been in C for a long time and are now in the last third of it.
Considering how slow the market moves, the developments that will confirm (or not) these scenarios are going to take several months.
If the market will develop as I expect during the next month, I'll post a chart of what I believe possible during the next year or so.

[masterluc]

He is my bearish alter ego 

I think the assumption that the 152 bottom was C is flawed.

The 152 bottom was wave 3. The correction up to 317 was corrective up to wave 4. The correction was not a standard Zigzag because wave 2 was a Zigzag, rule of alternation. So from 152 to 317 it was a Flat correction. 3-3-5 pattern. The 309 top was A, 210 bottom was B and from 210 to 317 was C. The pudding here is that the rise from 210 to 317 was an impulse, that is how a Flat 3-3-5 pattern looks like. It fooled everyone into believing that the bull market had resumed. Sprinkle with breaking the downward trend line from 1163 and hopium was blinding everyone.

After the 4 top was reached the price immediately resumed falling. We are on wave 2 of 5 down to A!

Minor Wave 1 brought us through the trendline of the 4 correction. Minor wave 2 retested the trendine from below and was rejected. It has since fallen minuette wave 1 and 2 is soon finished correcting upwards.

If this is correct we are extremely close to starting wave 3 of wave 3 down towards 5 and A.

Just look at the pattern from my proposed 4. Everything going down from 4 to Minor 1 = impulse waves, everything going up = corrective.

The bear market is in full swing.

Price targets for 5/A are less than 152, more than 65.

Ive made an image that explains my view in more detail:

[Eivind Nag]

He is my bearish alter ego 

I think the assumption that the 152 bottom was C is flawed.

The 152 bottom was wave 3. The correction up to 317 was corrective up to wave 4. The correction was not a standard Zigzag because wave 2 was a Zigzag, rule of alternation. So from 152 to 317 it was a Flat correction. 3-3-5 pattern. The 309 top was A, 210 bottom was B and from 210 to 317 was C. The pudding here is that the rise from 210 to 317 was an impulse, that is how a Flat 3-3-5 pattern looks like. It fooled everyone into believing that the bull market had resumed. Sprinkle with breaking the downward trend line from 1163 and hopium was blinding everyone.

After the 4 top was reached the price immediately resumed falling. We are on wave 2 of 5 down to A!

Minor Wave 1 brought us through the trendline of the 4 correction. Minor wave 2 retested the trendine from below and was rejected. It has since fallen minuette wave 1 and 2 is soon finished correcting upwards.

If this is correct we are extremely close to starting wave 3 of wave 3 down towards 5 and A.

Just look at the pattern from my proposed 4. Everything going down from 4 to Minor 1 = impulse waves, everything going up = corrective.

The bear market is in full swing.

Price targets for 5/A are less than 152, more than 65.

Ive made an image that explains my view in more detail:
https://i.imgur.com/RkzXcY1.jpg

Just to clarify one big mistake in my wave count: After 317 top, 4. Wave 3 downwards to 5 is complete, the ABC correction upwards from 198 is to 4. A perfect 0.382 retrace.

So the end of 5 will be more shallow than i first thought. maybe just under a double bottom from 153.

If its C in the end there future will tell.

[Fakhoury]

He is my bearish alter ego  

I think the assumption that the 152 bottom was C is flawed.

The 152 bottom was wave 3. The correction up to 317 was corrective up to wave 4. The correction was not a standard Zigzag because wave 2 was a Zigzag, rule of alternation. So from 152 to 317 it was a Flat correction. 3-3-5 pattern. The 309 top was A, 210 bottom was B and from 210 to 317 was C. The pudding here is that the rise from 210 to 317 was an impulse, that is how a Flat 3-3-5 pattern looks like. It fooled everyone into believing that the bull market had resumed. Sprinkle with breaking the downward trend line from 1163 and hopium was blinding everyone.

After the 4 top was reached the price immediately resumed falling. We are on wave 2 of 5 down to A!

Minor Wave 1 brought us through the trendline of the 4 correction. Minor wave 2 retested the trendine from below and was rejected. It has since fallen minuette wave 1 and 2 is soon finished correcting upwards.

If this is correct we are extremely close to starting wave 3 of wave 3 down towards 5 and A.

Just look at the pattern from my proposed 4. Everything going down from 4 to Minor 1 = impulse waves, everything going up = corrective.

The bear market is in full swing.

Price targets for 5/A are less than 152, more than 65.

Ive made an image that explains my view in more detail:
https://i.imgur.com/RkzXcY1.jpg

Just to clarify one big mistake in my wave count: After 317 top, 4. Wave 3 downwards to 5 is complete, the ABC correction upwards from 198 is to 4. A perfect 0.382 retrace.

So the end of 5 will be more shallow than i first thought. maybe just under a double bottom from 153.

If its C in the end there future will tell.

What about ignoring people PM's and posts here, don't you want to clarify on this ?

Nevermind, he replied to me.

[ElectricMucus]

What is there to clarify? Just zoom all the way out to the beginning of Bitcoin trading and look at the beast in full glorious doom. You don't have to even draw anything, it stares you right in the face. EW is still overrated though.

[RyNinDaCleM]

If your analysis turns out right (which I give a slightly higher probability than masterlucs scenario) and 'A' reaches $110 to $65 where do you see 'C'? ~$20 to $10?

I will try to see how low it can possibly go without invalidating the entire wavecount. But maybe A and C would be a double bottom or very close. I dont think there is so much room downward under 70 before it would invalidate. I have to sleep now but i can try tomorrow to make a guesstimate on tima and amplitude of C.

Wave 2 has no invalidation except a move below the beginning of wave 1. In this case, that would be a price of $.05 from the Gox chart in 2010. Since this is extremely unlikely, it is all a waiting game.

For the record, I agree 90% in your analysis. The other 10% is only that I don't think your 1 was a 1. I do have a count where that same leading diagonal is drawn but is a wave A. Even if that means it was A of an even larger A that we are waiting to complete. Or the other possibility that we are in a triple zigzag. Either way, I have had the belief that we will see LL's (with double digits likely) before we see ATH's for many months now. I can only show my PoV so many times before it becomes boarder line spam. Everyone here knows my stance on this.

RyN, I think you talk about this count that you posted: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=274613.msg11887151#msg11887151

In the scenario where Eivind's 1 would be an A, then where would be the end of your B? At 318$? Or would we still be in that B now?

That chart was more to show the time aspect of a large wave-II versus the smaller degree but potentially complete wave-(4) of III. The finer resolution count is what I was referring to. Something like this


If it wasn't a (4) of III as it is in the bottom pic of that link, then I have no option for a bull market to new highs before making new lows or at least getting a full impulse lower (but still truncated) with a bullish looking rise from the lows (not any of this high volume for the initial bounce and then quickly dying off through the rest of the rise nonsense). As Tzupy said, the B kind of fell short and though it's not exactly invalidated as a count, it seems much less likely now... The highest high since January and yet indicators are showing a bearish divergence. Not good for those currently bullish. 

[masterluc]

That chart was more to show the time aspect of a large wave-II versus the smaller degree but potentially complete wave-(4) of III. The finer resolution count is what I was referring to. Something like this


If it wasn't a (4) of III as it is in the bottom pic of that link, then I have no option for a bull market to new highs before making new lows or at least getting a full impulse lower (but still truncated) with a bullish looking rise from the lows (not any of this high volume for the initial bounce and then quickly dying off through the rest of the rise nonsense). As Tzupy said, the B kind of fell short and though it's not exactly invalidated as a count, it seems much less likely now... The highest high since January and yet indicators are showing a bearish divergence. Not good for those currently bullish. 

https://youtu.be/yOvmRSYeSJY

[Tzupy]

@RyNinDaCleM: the scenarios you presented imply that the market is now moving a lot faster, at least since July, and I'm not convinced yet.
Previously the market was 2.5x - 3x slower than during April - June 2014. To confirm such a speed-up, the 200$ support level should be breached during the next 2 weeks.
If however there will be a slump to 200$ - 210$, followed by a rebound to maybe 250$, then IMO the speed stays about the same (major bottoms won't change much though).

[Afrikoin]

@RyNinDaCleM: the scenarios you presented imply that the market is now moving a lot faster, at least since July, and I'm not convinced yet.

RyNinDaClem's chart shows the market is moving slower ie taking longer to make the same A-B's OR 1-2's vs April 2014. That is what i see.

eg compare the 1-2 in June/July 2014, and what is supposed to be 1 unfolding of 2 within A/B (inverse) presently

[RyNinDaCleM]

@RyNinDaCleM: the scenarios you presented imply that the market is now moving a lot faster, at least since July, and I'm not convinced yet.
Previously the market was 2.5x - 3x slower than during April - June 2014. To confirm such a speed-up, the 200$ support level should be breached during the next 2 weeks.
If however there will be a slump to 200$ - 210$, followed by a rebound to maybe 250$, then IMO the speed stays about the same (major bottoms won't change much though).

That isn't drawn to a time scale except maybe the 5th of A/1/A. The B would likely be longer in time than I have drawn there, which in turn would move the C out in time. The C can take pretty much as long as it want's too, so I didn't even try to use fibo time on these moves. I only showed that down is what I see as most likely in the mid term. Once we have some more waves confirmed (especially a complete A to find the B target for both time and price, but also the early waves of C (1 and 2)), then I will start to give more probable lower end targets.

This A is taking longer than the A of (X)/(B)/(Xx), so I wouldn't say I show any speed up of the movement. I only have a limited amount of screen space and the top is almost off the screen, so I drew it in the allotted space showing direction and number of waves remaining without regard to time.

[Tzupy]

@RyNinDaCleM: the scenarios you presented imply that the market is now moving a lot faster, at least since July, and I'm not convinced yet.

RyNinDaClem's chart shows the market is moving slower ie taking longer to make the same A-B's OR 1-2's vs April 2014. That is what i see.

eg compare the 1-2 in June/July 2014, and what is supposed to be 1 unfolding of 2 within A/B (inverse) presently

Yeah, the red one is moving slower (or at least a lot deeper, too bearish even for me ), I should have paid more attention.
But the blue scenario is moving much faster, too fast for my liking. In my most probable scenario, the blue 3 is in fact the 1. We'll know in about two weeks.

[RyNinDaCleM]

@RyNinDaCleM: the scenarios you presented imply that the market is now moving a lot faster, at least since July, and I'm not convinced yet.

RyNinDaClem's chart shows the market is moving slower ie taking longer to make the same A-B's OR 1-2's vs April 2014. That is what i see.

eg compare the 1-2 in June/July 2014, and what is supposed to be 1 unfolding of 2 within A/B (inverse) presently

Yeah, the red one is moving slower (or at least a lot deeper, too bearish even for me ), I should have paid more attention.
But the blue scenario is moving much faster, too fast for my liking. In my most probable scenario, the blue 3 is in fact the 1. We'll know in about two weeks.

Riiight, truncated 5th of C.... You might be right about that 1 instead of 3

[klee]

Not sure if I did everything ok (I used a simple 200MA, 1w chart) but seems to me case is closed: