This BTC bear market is very similar to the 2011 BTC bear market

[kingscrown]

thign is there was 1k then and now due to all merchants or top is 500

[Alonzo Ewing]

Aside from that, the two corrections are following a very similar path and the 4th wave of a cycle tends to be twice as long (or longer) as the 2nd wave. The bear market that led from $31.9099 to $1.994 was the wave-2 of the same degree as this correction where this correction is likely wave-4.

In this scenario, the rise to $1200 was wave 5 of III, correct? (I don't know the exact nomenclature; I'm using the rise to $32 as "I" here.)  Some E-wavers are expecting another rise above $1200 to be 5, which doesn't make any sense because this current phase is so long, it should correlate to "II", the previous bear market, with the current wave being IV.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Aside from that, the two corrections are following a very similar path and the 4th wave of a cycle tends to be twice as long (or longer) as the 2nd wave. The bear market that led from $31.9099 to $1.994 was the wave-2 of the same degree as this correction where this correction is likely wave-4.

In this scenario, the rise to $1200 was wave 5 of III, correct? (I don't know the exact nomenclature; I'm using the rise to $32 as "I" here.)  Some E-wavers are expecting another rise above $1200 to be 5, which doesn't make any sense because this current phase is so long, it should correlate to "II", the previous bear market, with the current wave being IV.

It's a Gox chart, but I think I have it set up so everyone can tell where I'm going with this
Red count is a completed cycle and can end anywhere above $0.05 (deal with it )
Green is where we are still in (4) of III.


In my quoted post, I misspoke on the count I was referring to. This isn't IV to 2011's II. It's either [II] where 2011 peak was I of [ I ], OR we are in (4) of III of [ I ]. In both cases, the time spent in this correction is consistent for the wave that it is. This (4) is a little over 2x the (2) in time. Typical for a wave-4. If it's the [II], then there is no precedent to even compare it to since it's of a larger degree than Bitcoin has seen in it's short history, and can be expected to last anywhere from 38.2%-100%+ of the time it took to complete the entire rise to the $1163 top.

[cbeast]

It's not a bear market at all. It's a larger Rule of Thirds megacycle between 300 and 600 and a Rule of Thirds cycle between 330 and 360. Given that volatility is growing at the low end puts pressure upwards to break into the next 430-460 cycle after going through some superstitious points in CNY currency with triple matching digits.

[Alonzo Ewing]

It's a Gox chart, but I think I have it set up so everyone can tell where I'm going with this
Red count is a completed cycle and can end anywhere above $0.05 (deal with it )
Green is where we are still in (4) of III.


In my quoted post, I misspoke on the count I was referring to. This isn't IV to 2011's II. It's either [II] where 2011 peak was I of [ I ], OR we are in (4) of III of [ I ]. In both cases, the time spent in this correction is consistent for the wave that it is. This (4) is a little over 2x the (2) in time. Typical for a wave-4. If it's the [II], then there is no precedent to even compare it to since it's of a larger degree than Bitcoin has seen in it's short history, and can be expected to last anywhere from 38.2%-100%+ of the time it took to complete the entire rise to the $1163 top.

Great, thank you.  I'd been asking around for a long term count, and this helps a lot.

1) In the [II] situation, the bear market could go on a long time, and we could drop pretty far yet.  But the upshot is that we still have the powerful [III] yet to come.

2) In the (4) of III of [1] situation, we should be near the end of (4) given what you said.  Since (5) are typically small, we might have a IV that's similarly long (a year, since II was 6 months), and that would result in two years of essentially sideways action before V starts.

[RyNinDaCleM]

It's a Gox chart, but I think I have it set up so everyone can tell where I'm going with this
Red count is a completed cycle and can end anywhere above $0.05 (deal with it )
Green is where we are still in (4) of III.
[img]

In my quoted post, I misspoke on the count I was referring to. This isn't IV to 2011's II. It's either [II] where 2011 peak was I of [ I ], OR we are in (4) of III of [ I ]. In both cases, the time spent in this correction is consistent for the wave that it is. This (4) is a little over 2x the (2) in time. Typical for a wave-4. If it's the [II], then there is no precedent to even compare it to since it's of a larger degree than Bitcoin has seen in it's short history, and can be expected to last anywhere from 38.2%-100%+ of the time it took to complete the entire rise to the $1163 top.

Great, thank you.  I'd been asking around for a long term count, and this helps a lot.

1) In the [II] situation, the bear market could go on a long time, and we could drop pretty far yet.  But the upshot is that we still have the powerful [III] yet to come.

2) In the (4) of III of [1] situation, we should be near the end of (4) given what you said.  Since (5) are typically small, we might have a IV that's similarly long (a year, since II was 6 months), and that would result in two years of essentially sideways action before V starts.

You are correct!
A 2nd wave can retrace up to 100% of the wave-1, so yes it technically could go on for quite some time yet. But I highly doubt we would see double digits. The (5) of III can be larger than you think. Remember when I was showing you that the large time frame 5ths are often larger than the wave-3's of the same degree, so we could be talking of a few $1000's for the top. Then, since wave-4's usually fall to the 4 of one lesser degree, we would end up back in this area again once the III is complete. Maybe not this low, but below $1163.

For the record, I have indicators that say this is not the [II], so I'm of the belief that this is indeed (4) of III.

[Alonzo Ewing]

The (5) of III can be larger than you think. Remember when I was showing you that the large time frame 5ths are often larger than the wave-3's of the same degree, so we could be talking of a few $1000's for the top.

Yes, I remember.  Wave 3 in this case went from $5 to $1163.  In % terms, that's huge.  Though in absolute terms, not so much.

[cbeast]

In this scenario, the rise to $1200 was wave 5 of III, correct?

Yes, I remember.  Wave 3 in this case went from $5 to $1163.

Brilliant!

[Alonzo Ewing]

In this scenario, the rise to $1200 was wave 5 of III, correct?

Yes, I remember.  Wave 3 in this case went from $5 to $1163.

Brilliant!

Note that the first is a question, and the second is a statement.  In between was a clarification.

[cbeast]

In this scenario, the rise to $1200 was wave 5 of III, correct?

Yes, I remember.  Wave 3 in this case went from $5 to $1163.

Brilliant!

Note that the first is a question, and the second is a statement.  In between was a clarification.

Nothing personal, it's just that they seem like very different patterns and would be difficult to confuse. I am more confused than ever how this system makes any sense.

[oda.krell]

Great thread OP. Also, started one of the best discussion in ages in here

Just to summarize what I believe is a widely held sentiment: yes, there is a striking similarity, but with the crucial difference that 2011 was a correction in price, while 2014 seems to be a correction in time.

Both have the same effect in the end, that "expected price" (like the well known loglinear extrapolations) and actual price are wide apart, just the way it gets to this point is slightly different.

[Biodom]

Great thread OP. Also, started one of the best discussion in ages in here

Just to summarize what I believe is a widely held sentiment: yes, there is a striking similarity, but with the crucial difference that 2011 was a correction in price, while 2014 seems to be a correction in time.

Both have the same effect in the end, that "expected price" (like the well known loglinear extrapolations) and actual price are wide apart, just the way it gets to this point is slightly different.

maybe we should have a contest on:
1. whether this is a terminal decline and price never recovers
2. If the price recovers what would be the bottom in price and time

personally, I am with scenario #2, but looking at Japan stock market makes me shudder: they had a 40 year unstoppable bull market, peaked at 39K, then 25 year bear market, which is still technically ongoing even with the recovery from 7K to 17K in the last 5-6 years.

I am following many threads, but had yet to seen a prediction of a low that looks valid. In fact, $280 prediction in the first post could easily be $140 if you compare with 2011 scenario.

[cbeast]

Google: Bitcoin is dead
returns About 853,000 results (0.63 seconds)

[oda.krell]

Great thread OP. Also, started one of the best discussion in ages in here

Just to summarize what I believe is a widely held sentiment: yes, there is a striking similarity, but with the crucial difference that 2011 was a correction in price, while 2014 seems to be a correction in time.

Both have the same effect in the end, that "expected price" (like the well known loglinear extrapolations) and actual price are wide apart, just the way it gets to this point is slightly different.

maybe we should have a contest on:
1. whether this is a terminal decline and price never recovers
2. If the price recovers what would be the bottom in price and time

personally, I am with scenario #2, but looking at Japan stock market makes me shudder: they had a 40 year unstoppable bull market, peaked at 39K, then 25 year bear market, which is still technically ongoing even with the recovery from 7K to 17K in the last 5-6 years.

I am following many threads, but had yet to seen a prediction of a low that looks valid. In fact, $280 prediction in the first post could easily be $140 if you compare with 2011 scenario.

I'm not completely convinced myself that we saw the final bottom of this bear market, but I'm also not quite as sure as some other posters that we're pretty much certain to make another lower low. I personally find retest of, say, 320, then continued crawl up, quite plausible as well.

To latch onto OP's comparison to the 2011 correction, I'm personally starting to wonder if we're in a similar state as in March 2012: final bottom was in (2$), the first serious bull run (to 7$) was utterly destroyed by dumps, and there was still a long way ahead before even that 7$ local peak was reached again. Yet, no more lower low came in, and in the end that was good enough.

[bitebits]

Google: Bitcoin is dead
returns About 853,000 results (0.63 seconds)

Like this, you are searching for the separate words.

Use " ... " instead, which leads to the below conclusion that the dollar is more dead

"Bitcoin is dead" -> 507 results
"Dollar is dead" -> 1960 results

[FUR11]

I really don't know what the final bottom is going to look like, but I'm fairly certain that we will find one and will then continue going up big time! Things do look a lot like 2011/2012, in fact. I believe shorting now may give you some minor gains, but could potentially be dangerous, as well!

[DieJohnny]

Another interesting thing I found, if we double bottom in a month we will also touch this famous trend line:

I think we will touch this trend line, not with a large drop but just dragging out the current 300-400 range. We may dip below $300 again but I think sub $200 is completely unlikely unless a major bitcoin failure event happens.

In two years Bitcoin will be worth $1000 again unless it is destroyed by hackers and competition(which includes govt).

I am holding Bitcoin and the only thing I am watching for is an Alt coin that will be there to take over if/when Bitcoin hits some unforeseen disasters.

[bucktotal]

a battle between the 2013 and 2012 trend lines... will the 2013 hold? will the 2012 hold? are we doomed?