Also, as you noticed our count of (1) - (4) differ. It was a bit tricky to define the starting point of this trend. I think this might be the source of this difference. But in my own defence I should say I was very scrupulous counting all the subwaves at the lower timeframes :)
From this point I think there are two possibilities - either we will reverse @ 1190, as I mentioned in an alternative count for this idea, or we can travel the whole distance to double top target 1170, where wave 4 rests.