BITSTAMP:BTCUSD   Bitcoin / U.S. Dollar
The first wave, (i), of c is underway. 264 is a good target level for wave v as it is the same length as wave i and is also 0.618 of wave i~iii
The target you gave the other day for wave (i) was 294. Do you consider the target hit at 262 now? If so, I guess we are headed for 250 for a few days before starting wave (iii) to 320.
user100000 rivet.popper
Yes, target "hit". 320 is just a prelim target because we need to know where exactly wave (ii) will end. Also, wave (iii) may extend or not; so can wave (v). Too early to tell of course. Lets count the waves as they go by
+2 Reply
rivet.popper user100000
Sorry to push on this point. I have been holding patiently for months and would like to see the ball get rolling.
Nice count.
+1 Reply
I've got a similar target level for different reasons. Nice when different analysis finds a common level.
+2 Reply
Wave (i) was supposed to be 294, and two days ago. What happened to all of that?
synechist rivet.popper
EW has no sense of time. I'm not sure why you keep asking user10000 for dates. He's being obliging by posting guesses, but there's no basis for them and I think you'd do best to not ask.
rivet.popper synechist
Because he predicted 294 by April 3rd, that's why. If these are guesses he should say that in the post instead of giving precise plot points claiming to be based on infallible mathematical projections.
synechist rivet.popper
Like I said, my impression is that he's being obliging because you've asked for dates so often, not because his method produces dates.

I don't think that user10000 is trying to imply that EW is an infallible mathematical projection either.

So to summarise: a lot of your posts have had a mildly accusatory tone, either asking for dates or noting when user10000 is mistaken. Perhaps this is due to your idea that user10000 is posting as if his predictions are infallible. but EW predictions are NEVER infallible, and that if there's any shortcoming in user1000's work, it's not that he assumes infallibility, but that he doesn't post multiple potential outcomes instead of just his favoured wave count.

EW is a very flexible system, and never hard and fast. As a result, I think we should all interpret user10000's posts accordingly, as hypotheses – best guesses – which is all they can ever be.
rivet.popper synechist
"...if there's any shortcoming in user1000's work, it's not that he assumes infallibility, but that he doesn't post multiple potential outcomes instead of just his favoured wave count." I agree with this.

Of course his favorite wave count is mine too, because it sees BTC go way up, but I think if he wants to be taken seriously for his hard work, he has to be more objective, admit that this is the wave count he CHOSE from several others, and of course, stop putting date projections in his posts.

I have never accused him of anything, only asked for explanation, and I have consistently thanked him for his work and for sharing it with us.
+2 Reply
EN English
EN English (UK)
EN English (IN)
DE Deutsch
FR Français
ES Español
IT Italiano
PL Polski
TR Türkçe
RU Русский
PT Português
ID Bahasa Indonesia
MS Bahasa Melayu
TH ภาษาไทย
VI Tiếng Việt
JA 日本語
KO 한국어
ZH 简体中文
ZH 繁體中文
AR العربية
Home Stock Screener Forex Signal Finder Cryptocurrency Signal Finder Economic Calendar How It Works Chart Features House Rules Moderators Website & Broker Solutions Widgets Stock Charting Library Feature Request Blog & News FAQ Help & Wiki Twitter
Profile Profile Settings Account and Billing My Support Tickets Contact Support Ideas Published Followers Following Private Messages Chat Sign Out