Not sure why you feel this is ending diagonal. I originally slipped up and said it might be but that was very early on. However. Ending diagonal would be a patter to see after intimal decline and then retracement followed by this ending diagonal. Hence it is called so. But in this chart it seems it is commencing from Nov 2013 high. So it would have to be a leading diagonal rather than ending. Also, if the wave 5 = wave 1 on throw over, it would violate the rule in that wave 3 would be the shortest. Hope you don't mind me sharing this with you.

thanks. appreciate your visit.
i believe we have different counts. im unsure if you are aware of my count. wave 3 was very strong (2.618*wave 1). so its reasonable to assume wave 5 would not be strong enough to go beyond wave 3 so i realized it may be an ending diagonal developing for the final wave. as you know, when there is exhaustion in trend such as strong wave 3 market create ending diagonal .

this is my wave 5 of C. again we have different counts i believe so i couldn't follow your chart.

regarding wave5=wave1, i was reffering to a larger degree wave 1 on another older chart (not the wave 1 of diagonal):

Ah, I see, you are saying ending diagonal from the recent high at 454. My bad. OK interesting. So see how this will develop. Mt ending diagonal as larger wave C is for price action since Jan 2014 high and also in wave 5 which will be abc or wxy zigzag with 240 as the price target.

It is possible for the labels you have on that, however the trouble for that is it is very hard to have 5 internal waves clearly labelled in your wave 3 without bending the rules. Like wise in wave 5. So whilst it might still work in your scenario, but I would not be very confident in that. wxy are just corrective waves and can be applied in corrective cycle where abc don't fit as wave c required 5 waves internally.

it just make sense to me because wave 4 is sideways action wave so it looks good in wxy. i shall try to take a look at my wave 3 to see if i can get five waves out of it... wave 5 isn't over yet of course. wave 3 of 5 surely was extended

Yes I see. This sort of counts have been proposed earlier by others. After the major 1 2 next lower series of counts have wave 3 as the shortest. So not sure if this is valid count. The point I am making is that there is issues with this as counted as 1-5 impulsive move. It can only be counted as abc or wxy. The it becomes 3 swings rather then 5. In which case it seem to fit the 3-3-3-3-3 ending diagonal as per my charts with wave c starting from Jan high.

leading diagonal has wave 1 longest. wave 1 and 4 overlap. wave 4 doesn't go beyond 2. looks good. i don't see a problem..... i see all five waves clearly to 400. im not sure whats the problem. it looks impulsive

In that case the issue is with wave 3 being the shortest. So it would be stretching the rules or breaching it. But the full implication would be settled with further price action and confirming the conclusion or otherwise.

OK, I don't really mind, but in case of throw over, wave 3 cannot be the shortest. It can be equal to wave 5 but not the shortest. I could be wrong but that is my understanding.

I understand where you you coming from, but the rule is that wave 3 cannot be the shortest. If you still have to fit the price to your count with wave 3 being the shortest, something is not right. That is all I am saying.

Not sure why you feel this is ending diagonal. I originally slipped up and said it might be but that was very early on. However. Ending diagonal would be a patter to see after intimal decline and then retracement followed by this ending diagonal. Hence it is called so. But in this chart it seems it is commencing from Nov 2013 high. So it would have to be a leading diagonal rather than ending. Also, if the wave 5 = wave 1 on throw over, it would violate the rule in that wave 3 would be the shortest. Hope you don't mind me sharing this with you.

i believe we have different counts. im unsure if you are aware of my count. wave 3 was very strong (2.618*wave 1). so its reasonable to assume wave 5 would not be strong enough to go beyond wave 3 so i realized it may be an ending diagonal developing for the final wave. as you know, when there is exhaustion in trend such as strong wave 3 market create ending diagonal .

this is my wave 5 of C. again we have different counts i believe so i couldn't follow your chart.

regarding wave5=wave1, i was reffering to a larger degree wave 1 on another older chart (not the wave 1 of diagonal):

i thot wave C was over but apparently its not