All Things Stock Market Thread

most viewed right now
 130
Video inside Toronto rapper Robin Banks shot 9 times and paralyzed from the neck down
31 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 127
NBA The RICHEST NBA player who nobody knows about...
15 comments
@sports
most viewed right now
 92
NBA DarealLambo "EX Step Father" Comes For His Son
33 comments
@sports
most viewed right now
 57
BOX Well Damn Conor is out here giving Paulie Malignaggi that work
80 comments
@sports

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

 5 years ago '08        #781
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
You're right, it isn't a partial recovery.

The forecast posted above is just a guide, which followed through. The 1312-1318 is just another level of support that was expected, but it bottomed out near 1325 instead, which still makes the analysis valid. Today's new high clearly changes the "partial" recovery prediction. A move to mid 1380s sounds more like it. Ill try to post another analysis for $SPX tonight.

But it never completed all the waves. That's what EW is about. So it is wrong.

And it was wrong on the upside as well, by a lot.
 5 years ago '10        #782
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:
But it never completed all the waves. That's what EW is about. So it is wrong.

And it was wrong on the upside as well, by a lot.
Price won't always meet the analysts targets. Nothing is perfect, and people who don't use it expect it to be. It's supposed to guide you as to when the next move is, and in which direction, which it clearly does. That's the point. But for you to ask for a specific level for every wave (up or down), is asking for perfection...and nothing is perfect.

You're obviously supposed to take everything else into consideration. Indicators, patterns, etc. You're predicting price action. Predictions aren't always correct. You're having a difficult time digesting that.
 5 years ago '08        #783
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
The only thing that was right on that chart was the 1324 target (we hit 1325). But there was major support in the 1325 - 1330 area regardless of Elliot Wave.

It was clear support from a channel we've been in the last couple of months.


[pic - click to view]






That analysis is not valid at all. Not sure why you think it is when it showed it breaking down to 1312 and only recovering partially. We never tested 1318 or 1312 and the "partial" recovery according to that diagram shows us moving back to 1334. And we went to 1375 today, 40 handles higher than what was expected...

It wasn't even close.















 5 years ago '08        #784
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
Price won't always meet the analysts targets. Nothing is perfect, and people who don't use it expect it to be. It's supposed to guide you as to when the next move is, and in which direction, which it clearly does. That's the point. But for you to ask for a specific level for every wave (up or down), is asking for perfection...and nothing is perfect.

You're obviously supposed to take everything else into consideration. Indicators, patterns, etc. You're predicting price action. Predictions aren't always correct. You're having a difficult time digesting that.




That's what TA is all about. Yes you are supposed to reach a certain level each time. Maybe not to the exact cent, but what that showed was nowhere even close. It was wrong on the downside by 20 handles and wrong on the upside by 40 handles.

You're simply justifying it being correct because you use it.


You're changing the targets now obviously because it was wrong. Saying the new target is in the mid 1385's makes the previous targets invalid....because it was wrong.

If the new target is 1385 and the previous target showed a partial recovery to 1335 that means that analysis was off by 50 handles...which is not close at all.

Just because the markets happened to bounce off other key technical support (not EW support) does not make the elliot wave theory correct.

It's easy to trade in hindsight.


Last edited by o7media; 07-18-2012 at 04:02 PM..
 5 years ago '10        #785
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:
The only thing that was right on that chart was the 1324 target (we hit 1325). But there was major support in the 1325 - 1330 area regardless of Elliot Wave.

It was clear support from a channel we've been in the last couple of months.[/B]


[pic - click to view]






That analysis is not valid at all. Not sure why you think it is when it showed it breaking down to 1312 and only recovering partially. We never tested 1318 or 1312 and the "partial" recovery according to that diagram shows us moving back to 1334. And we went to 1375 today, 40 handles higher than what was expected...

It wasn't even close.














Yes, it shows a recovery back to 1334. That's what predictions are. And I told you, you have to adjust accordingly when price doesn't confirm your targets. That's what it's about. If you actually think EW is going to consistently be correct, you're wrong.

I told you before, it's guiding you towards which direction the next move will be. And we don't need to test 1312 for the that analysis to be correct/valid. Again, you're predicting where price COULD end up. Apparently you're not understand what this method of trading is about.
 5 years ago '10        #786
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:



That's what TA is all about. Yes you are supposed to reach a certain level each time. Maybe not to the exact cent, but what that showed was nowhere even close. It was wrong on the downside by 20 handles and wrong on the upside by 40 handles.

You're simply justifying it being correct because you use it.


You're changing the targets now obviously because it was wrong. Saying the new target is in the mid 1385's makes the previous targets invalid....because it was wrong.

If the new target is 1385 and the previous target showed a partial recovery to 1335 that means that analysis was off by 50 handles...which is not close at all.

Just because the markets happened to bounce off other key technical support (not EW support) does not make the elliot wave theory correct.

It's easy to trade in hindsight.
It's a different method.

Different method's have different styles of trading and predicting what the next move will be. Like you said before, EW isn't for everyone.
 5 years ago '10        #787
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
I don't trade using it just yet. I will soon though. I'm going by what I see everyday in the market...and most tops and bottoms are met (not on the penny). Nothing goes up or down in a straight line. And nothing is guaranteed.
 5 years ago '08        #788
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
Yes, it shows a recovery back to 1334. That's what predictions are. And I told you, you have to adjust accordingly when price doesn't confirm your targets. That's what it's about. If you actually think EW is going to consistently be correct, you're wrong.

I told you before, it's guiding you towards which direction the next move will be. And we don't need to test 1312 for the that analysis to be correct/valid. Again, you're predicting where price COULD end up. Apparently you're not understand what this method of trading is about.


...........




 iNsane said:

But, do you think Elliott Wave is accurate? I can't just trade using moving averages and volume. I've lost more money than I've made using that strategy.



............




 o7media said:
I don't think Elliot Wave theory is accurate, and I don't use it.



You just proved my point. Elliot Wave theory is not accurate.

And you're still justifying it because you like it for some reason. You even just said yourself that it's not accurate, so why are you using something that's not accurate?

You can get the same exact result from simply using trend lines or Fibonacci retracements and they are 100x more accurate, sometimes to the exact cent.








 5 years ago '10        #789
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:
...........









............









You just proved my point. Elliot Wave theory is not accurate.

And you're still justifying it because you like it for some reason. You even just said yourself that it's not accurate, so why are you using something that's not accurate?

You can get the same exact result from simply using trend lines or Fibonacci retracements and they are 100x more accurate, sometimes to the exact cent.








I asked you a while go what your thoughts were on EW and you're using it against me?

And sometimes EW can be correct...to the exact penny. Perhaps correct and accurate are the wrong phrases to use. But it doesn't matter...you'll never understand the point I'm trying to make.
 5 years ago '10        #790
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:
...........









............









You just proved my point. Elliot Wave theory is not accurate.

And you're still justifying it because you like it for some reason. You even just said yourself that it's not accurate, so why are you using something that's not accurate?

You can get the same exact result from simply using trend lines or Fibonacci retracements and they are 100x more accurate, sometimes to the exact cent.








I said it's not going to be consistently accurate
 5 years ago '08        #791
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
I asked you a while go what your thoughts were on EW and you're using it against me?

And sometimes EW can be correct...to the exact penny. Perhaps correct and accurate are the wrong phrases to use. But it doesn't matter...you'll never understand the point I'm trying to make.

No I'm simply stating the fact that EW is not accurate. You're justifying your points though by changing targets constantly which doesn't make sense. Anyone can simply say "no, never mind it's going to this price now" and they would be right


But go ahead and post your analysis based on what EW says. I want to see this
 5 years ago '08        #792
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
I said it's not going to be consistently accurate



Justifying your responses now
 5 years ago '10        #793
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:
No I'm simply stating the fact that EW is not accurate. You're justifying your points though by changing targets constantly which doesn't make sense. Anyone can simply say "no, never mind it's going to this price now" and they would be right


But go ahead and post your analysis based on what EW says. I want to see this
No one is changing targets. I'm saying there always multiple targets price can meet. There are preferences, but if it doesn't meet an analysts preference doesn't make the analysis invalid. There isn't one price level on the table for every wave to meet.
 5 years ago '10        #794
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
Ok. Ill keep posting the charts when I receive them. I already know what your responses will be though

If I'm wrong, you'll gloat. If I'm right, it's because I got lucky, or that I'm not always right but it's still an invalid analysis.

I got you
 5 years ago '08        #795
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
No one is changing targets. I'm saying there always multiple targets price can meet. There are preferences, but if it doesn't meet an analysts preference doesn't make the analysis invalid. There isn't one price level on the table for every wave to meet.




It is changing targets. The original chart you posted showed a partial recovery to 1334, partial being the keyword there. Meaning after that move to 1334 the next wave down would come right?

But it never came. We blew past 1334 and we're well above that. Now you're saying the target is in mid 1380's.

So the target went from 1334 to 1380's....


Yeah not changing targets.
 5 years ago '10        #796
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:



It is changing targets. The original chart you posted showed a partial recovery to 1334, partial being the keyword there. Meaning after that move to 1334 the next wave down would come right?

But it never came. We blew past 1334 and we're well above that. Now you're saying the target is in mid 1380's.

So the target went from 1334 to 1380's....


Yeah not changing targets.
Ok, and? Are you not supposed to change your target when the first one was invalid?

It's like you have a resistance level for a stock to meet. If it breaks that, are you not going to predict the next level of resistance? Come on dude

EW will NOT always be right...as NOTHING is.
 5 years ago '08        #797
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
Ok. Ill keep posting the charts when I receive them. I already know what your responses will be though

If I'm wrong, you'll gloat. If I'm right, it's because I got lucky, or that I'm not always right but it's still an invalid analysis.

I got you



Nah. If it's correct I'll give it credit. But I've studied up on EW because others have told me to. Time after time it proves to be incorrect. I've been trading since '09 now and I know dozens of times where it was no where close.


You said that it's not always right, nothing's perfect. True, but I can point out multiple types of analysis that is not always wrong either... that's what EW is. It's not always wrong, but it's wrong a lot of times.....

That makes it inaccurate and a waste of time.
 5 years ago '08        #798
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
Ok, and? Are you not supposed to change your target when the first one was invalid?

It's like you have a resistance level for a stock to meet. If it breaks that, are you not going to predict the next level of resistance? Come on dude

EW will NOT always be right...as NOTHING is.




You've been arguing that it wasn't invalid this whole time. Now you're saying it is invalid?
So I'm right then?

Yeah you can change your targets when resistance/support is broken. But the target according to EW was never there to begin with. How is it broken if it's not there
 5 years ago '10        #799
Ambassador 444 heat pts444
space
space
space
$18,651 | Props total: 4 4
 o7media said:



You've been arguing that it wasn't invalid this whole time. Now you're saying it is invalid?
So I'm right then?

Yeah you can change your targets when resistance/support is broken. But the target according to EW was never there to begin with. How is it broken if it's not there
I've been saying the WHOLE method ISN'T invalid. I said if one level is invalid, are there not supposed to other options on the table?

And like I said, the guy who does these charts is updating his analysis to show where the market can potentially go. The 1380s target isn't on the chart I posted, because that wasn't an option until today. He didn't expect the market to reach this high. You have to adjust accordingly and that's what EW is about.
 5 years ago '08        #800
o7media 44 heat pts44
space
avatar space
space
$28,517 | Props total: 6832 6832
 iNsane said:
I've been saying the WHOLE method ISN'T invalid. I said if one level is invalid, are there not supposed to other options on the table?

And like I said, the guy who does these charts is updating his analysis to show where the market can potentially go. The 1380s target isn't on the chart I posted, because that wasn't an option until today. He didn't expect the market to reach this high. You have to adjust accordingly and that's what EW is about.

So you're trading with a method that is not valid.

So you're trading with a method that forces you to adjust price targets when it's proven to be wrong.

So basically Elliot Wave theory is trash, like I've been saying.

GOT IT!











Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 33
Image(s) inside I might not pullout
38 comments
1 day ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 24
Image(s) inside Jul 21 - Man who isn't father of child still owes child support
70 comments
1 day ago
@news
most viewed right now
 20
Image(s) inside Krissy Taylor showcasing her skills
99 comments
1 day ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 16
How Much You'd Have If You Saved $1 A Day For The Rest Of Your Life
59 comments
1 day ago
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 13
Video inside Charlie Sheen's '9/11' Movie Trailer Blasted as 'Offensive' and 'Extrem..
70 comments
1 day ago
@movies
most viewed right now
 9
NBA Kyrie Irving Asked For A Trade Because LeBron Hinders Teammates
400 comments
1 day ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 9
Video inside WTF Happened To Wild N Out?
130 comments
20 hours ago
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 8
Video inside Jul 21 - Flordia Teens filmed, mocked drowning man
93 comments
1 day ago
@news
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy