Critical Levels - EW analysis

[ssmc2]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

What's really crazy is that won't be the top.

[1714174980]

1714174980

[1714174980]

1714174980

[1714174980]

1714174980

[sandiman]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

I didn't get it?? chart?

[Tzupy]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

I didn't get it?? chart?

[meh32123]

Perhaps we are not in a B wave?

[sandiman]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

I didn't get it?? chart?

this is not in accordance with the rule of non-overlap, those are uncorrect waves 

[RyNinDaCleM]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

I didn't get it?? chart?

this is not in accordance with the rule of non-overlap, those are uncorrect waves 

It actually breaks 2 of 3 rules. 3 is also the shortest among not even making a hh above the 1. Come on tzupy, I know you can do better than that

[Spink]

RyNinDaCleM, by the way, your Sentiment is Still Bearish? 

[RyNinDaCleM]

RyNinDaCleM, by the way, your Sentiment is Still Bearish? 

It is, in the medium term. I will not say that I am absolutely correct. It is my belief that this is a large B where 150ish was A, and there is a C wave to come. This can change and I assure that I am sitting pretty in this rally. but this is a shorter term trade.

[BTCtrader71]

RyNinDaCleM, why in your signature do you place your medium term sentiment (bearish) rather than your short term (bullish, if I am not mistaken) or your long term (bullish)? Why not just place all 3?

[chessnut]

Assuming we are in an impulse rising from the last abc correction and without having the best bearings on the greater count this impulse analysis is probably the best bet for now. expect shallow corrections.

Following this chain of logic, a local top is in. we could range for some time now. As a guess, we are in a larger wave IV. Wave III was an extension. returning to wave iv territory would mean 4600 abouts. I cant rule out the chance of an ABC in place of a 1-2-3....  Patience folks 

[Tzupy]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

I didn't get it?? chart?

this is not in accordance with the rule of non-overlap, those are uncorrect waves 

It actually breaks 2 of 3 rules. 3 is also the shortest among not even making a hh above the 1. Come on tzupy, I know you can do better than that

First of all, I mentioned this sounds crazy. But bitcoin has raped the EW rules worse than that in August 2015, leading you (and me) to the wrong conclusions.
Back then the 4 not only went into 1 territory, it was lower than the 2, and this without counting the long squeeze, with that it went lower than the start of 1.
My opinion is that bitcoin performs the waves in different manners, depending on the available demand, and it would have taken only 10% lower prices
for the December rebound to fit within the rules (430$ instead of 475$).

[sandiman]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

I didn't get it?? chart?

img]https://i.imgur.com/Tr7ZnhN.png[/img]

this is not in accordance with the rule of non-overlap, those are uncorrect waves  

It actually breaks 2 of 3 rules. 3 is also the shortest among not even making a hh above the 1. Come on tzupy, I know you can do better than that

First of all, I mentioned this sounds crazy. But bitcoin has raped the EW rules worse than that in August 2015, leading you (and me) to the wrong conclusions.
Back then the 4 not only went into 1 territory, it was lower than the 2, and this without counting the long squeeze, with that it went lower than the start of 1.
My opinion is that bitcoin performs the waves in different manners, depending on the available demand, and it would have taken only 10% lower prices
for the December rebound to fit within the rules (430$ instead of 475$).

It is just impossible, rules cannot be broken. If your count is invalidated, count again, but rules must not be broken, whatever the stocks, commodities,...

If you think elliot waves are flawed in BTC trading (as I have seen, quite a few think that), just read a few pages of this topic : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=274613.0

[meh32123]

Ryan, I am wondering, what should bitcoin do in order to invalidate the theory that we are in the larger B wave?

[chessnut]

Premature rally was denied. This needs to correct more, expecting wave c of abc/flat/triangle or wxy.

[RyNinDaCleM]

RyNinDaCleM, why in your signature do you place your medium term sentiment (bearish) rather than your short term (bullish, if I am not mistaken) or your long term (bullish)? Why not just place all 3?

It all started when we hit the 150's low, and I still hadn't seen a rise from the lows that resembled an impulsive move. It was just a messy range with no conviction in either direction. It was more of a point that no matter what happened in the near future, I believe the bear market has not completed. I didn't put all three, because I really thought it would have moved faster than it has and didn't feel the need to put all three. Now, a few members make such a stink about it, it became fun. I will always be long term Bullish, otherwise I would not have put so much time and effort into Bitcoin (and the accumulation of) in the last 5½ years, but I still do not think this is the great bull rally.

Ryan, I am wondering, what should bitcoin do in order to invalidate the theory that we are in the larger B wave?

Considering a wave-B can make higher highs than the previous impulse high (1163 stamp), this B can make an ATH as a sort of troll move. So an ATH alone will not change my mind. There is a guide line that a move 138% of the wave-A is as big as a wave-B should ever be, and if exceeded, it probably isn't a B. Again, guide lines are not rules and can be broken to an extent while remaining valid. That will be the point that I really begin questioning my bearishness for the mid term.


No matter my bearishness, I am almost always adding to my cold holding. I have a specific custom indicator that tells me whether I take profits in Bitcoin or in fiat for my trades. The Bitcoin profits are periodically moved to cold storage while the fiat profits get left to trade another day. I rarely ever pull fiat out, and only if I need it for something (Bought a car in April 2014). I just maintain limits for my trading accounts.

[podyx]

Premature rally was denied. This needs to correct more, expecting wave c of abc/flat/triangle or wxy.

img]https://www.tradingview.com/x/BdjYcGaf/[/img]

It could also go sideways right? That's what I'm predicting we're gonna do. Range of 720-760

[chessnut]

Premature rally was denied. This needs to correct more, expecting wave c of abc/flat/triangle or wxy.

img]https://www.tradingview.com/x/BdjYcGaf/[/img]

It could also go sideways right? That's what I'm predicting we're gonna do. Range of 720-760

I think there is no good reason why it shouldnt go as low as $670 or 4500 yuan.

[darlidada]

Premature rally was denied. This needs to correct more, expecting wave c of abc/flat/triangle or wxy.

img]https://www.tradingview.com/x/BdjYcGaf/[/img]

It could also go sideways right? That's what I'm predicting we're gonna do. Range of 720-760

I think there is no good reason why it shouldnt go as low as $670 or 4500 yuan.

halving? miner price are 480$ pre halving

[notme]

How crazy does the following sound?
From February to May we had a local 3, within the second leg up of THE B wave, that was suppressed and lower than the 1, because of lack of fiat on Chinese exchanges.
And now we are experiencing the local 5, approaching the top of the "fools' rally". By this count, we might top in 4 - 5 days, around 900$ - 1000$.

I didn't get it?? chart?

this is not in accordance with the rule of non-overlap, those are uncorrect waves  

It actually breaks 2 of 3 rules. 3 is also the shortest among not even making a hh above the 1. Come on tzupy, I know you can do better than that

First of all, I mentioned this sounds crazy. But bitcoin has raped the EW rules worse than that in August 2015, leading you (and me) to the wrong conclusions.
Back then the 4 not only went into 1 territory, it was lower than the 2, and this without counting the long squeeze, with that it went lower than the start of 1.
My opinion is that bitcoin performs the waves in different manners, depending on the available demand, and it would have taken only 10% lower prices
for the December rebound to fit within the rules (430$ instead of 475$).

I believe the correct reading here is that 2 is where you have labeled 4.  What you have as 2 and 3 are just part of a long consolidation period.  Viewed in that light, the rules are preserved.  3 should be an impulse wave and your 3 doesn't come close to meeting that on price movement or volume.

Don't try to fit the rules into your interpretation.  Try to fit your interpretation to the rules.

[chessnut]

Premature rally was denied. This needs to correct more, expecting wave c of abc/flat/triangle or wxy.

img]https://www.tradingview.com/x/BdjYcGaf/[/img]

It could also go sideways right? That's what I'm predicting we're gonna do. Range of 720-760

I think there is no good reason why it shouldnt go as low as $670 or 4500 yuan.

halving? miner price are 480$ pre halving

Its an EW thread m8