Spike's Scientific Stock Analysis

[Adam]

Good chart. Much appreciated. I'll get in if I get the chance.

[spikefader]

A few counts:
the first 3 charts have 3 impulses left in them,
the last 2 charts showing correctives.

[DSteckler]

bad wave counts

Spike, it looks like you have a number of one bar impulse and corrective waves on your charts. Sorry, but that can't be the case when using daily bars.

[spikefader]

Spike, it looks like you have a number of one bar impulse and corrective waves on your charts. Sorry, but that can't be the case when using daily bars.

I question your logic. The 'locals' know I don't follow formal EW rules and have bastardized them. I'm a rebel I guess. But simplicity works for me.

But I encourage any charts with counts that you have. Post as many charts as your heart desires cuz I'm always a student! I never want to be thought of as blinkered or presumptuous!

[DSteckler]

<< Originally Posted by DSteckler
Spike, it looks like you have a number of one bar impulse and corrective waves on your charts. Sorry, but that can't be the case when using daily bars.

I question your logic. The 'locals' know I don't follow formal EW rules and have bastardized them. >>

Nothing wrong with adapting TA techniques to fit your trading style. But change them too much and you have to call them something else, or you'll confuse others who are trying to follow your analysis.

To answer your question as to my skepticism about a one bar wave, single bar corrective structures on the daily time frame usually takes place within a second wave structure where the energy of the pattern is so intense that there isn't enough time to trace out a 3 wave corrective daily structure between waves 1 and 3. These can look almost non-existent (this happens quite frequently in the commodities market).

A good example of such a structure would be the initial impulsive rally from the October 2002 bottoms which has given most Elliotician's fits as to identifying whether the total overall price structure we've seen since that time is one of a corrective or impulsive nature.

The only time I feel comfortable with a one bar corrective wave is when it stops smack-dab on top of a Fibo. retracement level.

[spikefader]

Nothing wrong with adapting TA techniques to fit your trading style. But change them too much and you have to call them something else, or you'll confuse others who are trying to follow your analysis.

Yes, excellent point Dave...you've prompted some thoughts today; thanks! Perhaps I should call what I do something else. Perhaps SST (Spike's Surge Theory) haha. I dunno. It never occurred to me. I guess it felt more proper to describe it as limited/simplified EW theory rather than to presume I could take what I see to be the best EW offers and simplify it and call it something else. What's in a name anyway?! Bottom line is the 12345abc pattern is fascinating cuz it repeats so much.

But I guess posting modified EW theory stuff is at risk of being misinterpreted or confused....... Maybe I should consider labelling differently; perhaps 12345678 and call them 'surges' rather than waves...perhaps 12345 are inducive surges, and 678 are reactive to the first 5 surges. Anything beyond 8 is simply a wash, or a 'rush' of surges that occurs until the next inducive surge occurs.

To answer your question as to my skepticism about a one bar wave, single bar corrective structures on the daily time frame usually takes place within a second wave structure where the energy of the pattern is so intense that there isn't enough time to trace out a 3 wave corrective daily structure between waves 1 and 3. These can look almost non-existent (this happens quite frequently in the commodities market).

Yes, indeed! Sometimes price action is just animalistic and violent and a clear corrective pattern takes place in a single day that is hidden in the daily timeframe! Does it make the pattern invalid cuz it isn't visible on the daily? Or does it make the charting when not aware of that intraday pattern invalid cuz you're missing a significant event in the hunt for the correct count. I dunno; I guess sometimes ya just gotta throw something in the 'too-hard' basket and move on haha

A good example of such a structure would be the initial impulsive rally from the October 2002 bottoms which has given most Elliotician's fits as to identifying whether the total overall price structure we've seen since that time is one of a corrective or impulsive nature.

Interesting. Do you think that every price structure should be 'definable' within the terms of any theory, whether it's EW or something else?

The way I look at it, perhaps naively, is that sometimes price can act in ways that are clearly not in-sych with a given methodology; sometimes market uniqueness delivers a price structure than is simply not worth trying to make 'fit' into whatever pattern you're trying to 'spot' and trade off.... and any attempt to make it fit is simply making it more complex, harder to learn and trade, wasting time and complicating 'efficient' and easy money-making processes. Sometimes a pattern just won't reveal itself in a chart, and what it does reveal ain't what yer lookin' fer.

Other prompted thoughts today: I could ponder (rather unscientifically) that: "Who cares if what I might label as 'c' goes on to have further correctives that others say I should label? Why is the labelling beyond 'c' important? I'm looking for something very simple; an impulsive/surging trending trade off a 'c' area, allowing tests of support within my stop limit/s, and as long as price moves in my favor within my limits I'm happy not even asking myself "why is the labelling of what that price pattern beyond 'c' that important?" I'll happily put the trade on simmer with stops in place and wait for target, early profit-taking, or stopout.

The most important thing to me as a trader is that the trade was i) within the plan, ii) that my 'c long' (or whatever other entry criteria) either worked or it didn't and iii) the trade was executed perfectly according to plan.

I'm not so fussed about describing and explaining every kind of pattern on the face of a chart. Rather; I was looking for a specific pattern, and either got it or didn't.

After that, it's "OK, that didn't work, I'm moving on, and back to stalking for the next setup"; where 'c' (or whatever other pattern) won't fail and I'll make a nice profit off my simplistic method.

Anyway, enough rambling thoughts for a while. I'll go and ponder this "8 -surge" labeling stuff and whether 'Surge Theory' would be a more suitable system name to attach to what I post about Thanks for the input and the prompting Dave! And if anyone else has thoughts on this stuff, post away.

[Runner]

Spike, now that IIC got my grasshopper juices flowing here are my words of wisdom:

It is not about being right that counts. It is making money in the markets that count. Many can be right about charts and FA stuff but not make any money. After all what is it we attempt to achieve? I’d think it is about making money, but I bet through these thousands of forums on the Internet that many argue about being right at the sacrifice of making money.

[skiracer]

Spike,
I think that you've done more for helping everyone here become acclimated to technical analysis, elliot wave theory, chart analysis an a whole lot more
on the technical aspects of trading than anyone is going to be able to match in a long time. On top of that you've done it without any egocentric personal agenda and with the sole purpose of helping anyone who asked for your time for free whenever they asked. Keep it going the way it has been going. It's a great stepping off point for anyone who is just beginning to pick it up and take it to whatever level they want to if they have the wherewithall and substance within themselves to carry on with it. Maybe when someone else has 50000/60000 posts and gives of themselves and their time in the same fashion as you have without asking for anything except that they just try to exhibit some of the qualities that your trying to propogate their credentials might just measure up to yours. In the meantime keep it going just the way you have been doing without any reservations. After all you are the Spikefader.

[Adam]

Spike,
I think that you've done more for helping everyone here become acclimated to technical analysis, elliot wave theory, chart analysis an a whole lot more
on the technical aspects of trading than anyone is going to be able to match in a long time. On top of that you've done it without any egocentric personal agenda and with the sole purpose of helping anyone who asked for your time for free whenever they asked. Keep it going the way it has been going. It's a great stepping off point for anyone who is just beginning to pick it up and take it to whatever level they want to if they have the wherewithall and substance within themselves to carry on with it. Maybe when someone else has 50000/60000 posts and gives of themselves and their time in the same fashion as you have without asking for anything except that they just try to exhibit some of the qualities that your trying to propogate their credentials might just measure up to yours. In the meantime keep it going just the way you have been doing without any reservations. After all you are the Spikefader.

Spike Rocks!!!

[Websman]

Spike Rocks!!!

He makes my brain hurt...

[Lyehopper]

Spike,
I think that you've done more for helping everyone here become acclimated to technical analysis, elliot wave theory, chart analysis an a whole lot more
on the technical aspects of trading than anyone is going to be able to match in a long time. On top of that you've done it without any egocentric personal agenda and with the sole purpose of helping anyone who asked for your time for free whenever they asked. Keep it going the way it has been going. It's a great stepping off point for anyone who is just beginning to pick it up and take it to whatever level they want to if they have the wherewithall and substance within themselves to carry on with it. Maybe when someone else has 50000/60000 posts and gives of themselves and their time in the same fashion as you have without asking for anything except that they just try to exhibit some of the qualities that your trying to propogate their credentials might just measure up to yours. In the meantime keep it going just the way you have been doing without any reservations. After all you are the Spikefader.

AMEN Skiracer!!!!.... PLUS.... He takes his precious time to (loyally) play the POTW weekly.

Spike!!!! You-DA-MAN.... DUUUUDE!!!!!!

[b_cadvantag]

Spike Rocks!!!

As someone who lurks more than posts.

Spike You Da Man!!!
(better than da bears!!)

[DSteckler]

<< What's in a name anyway?! >>

Anything you say, Mary. (ROTFL!)

<< Sometimes price action is just animalistic and violent and a clear corrective pattern takes place in a single day that is hidden in the daily timeframe! Does it make the pattern invalid cuz it isn't visible on the daily? >>

No, but why identify the wave on a daily chart if you're seeing impulse and/or corrective waves on an intraday time frame? Why not post a chart of the intraday time frame so everyone can see what you're seeing?

<< Do you think that every price structure should be 'definable' within the terms of any theory, whether it's EW or something else? >>

Ellioticians belive that all price movement can be indentified with 5 impulse and three corrective waves. If you're charting Elliot-style, you have to honor their methodology.

<< Sometimes a pattern just won't reveal itself in a chart, and what it does reveal ain't what yer lookin' fer. >>

The pattern is always there, Spike. Not everyone can see it. It takes a skilled technician to know which pattern is there when the obvious one's aren't visible. Many times that requires using a different discipline, e.g. Fib. analysis instead of chart pattern identification. That's one of the primary reasons why the Market Technicians Association requires CMT (Chartered Market Technician) candidates to pass 3 exams covering a broad selection of TA disciplines, before awarding the designation.

<< I could ponder (rather unscientifically) that: "Who cares if what I might label as 'c' goes on to have further correctives that others say I should label? >>

You can call it a ham sandwich if you want to (Jeff Cooper has dozens of bizarre names for his patterns but I think he's dropping acid when he names them <VBG>) but in TA words have specific meanings. When you say a stock is in a C wave but to you that means something different than its usual Elliot interpretation, you leave others scratching their heads trying to figure out what you're seeing.

[mimo_100]

Spike, now that IIC got my grasshopper juices flowing here are my words of wisdom:

It is not about being right that counts. It is making money in the markets that count. Many can be right about charts and FA stuff but not make any money. After all what is it we attempt to achieve? I’d think it is about making money, but I bet through these thousands of forums on the Internet that many argue about being right at the sacrifice of making money.

Ok, time that I weigh in on this.



IM Opinion, Runner put it in the simplest term – it is about making money.

No matter what the “system”, if you make money, who cares? Perhaps we need a tracking thread to follow the “C Spikes” and see, at least on paper, where the money is.



I understand where Steckler is coming from, that is, the point of view of a Certified Technician. Changing the definitions is a no no.



Hey, Spike, I love what you are doing. Sometimes I wonder how you determine where “1” starts. I may have missed the lesson. Is it posted on this forum? Don’t stop. I think everyone gains a lot from your posts, and especially your willingness to share your technical abilities – far beyond those of mortal men – except maybe MrMarket.



Tim

[skiracer]

With any type of analysis it is a matter of interpretation. A dozen CMT's will view a chart or a method of analysis a dozen different ways. I'm sure Dave is correct in his statements to a degree but Dave an everyone else who has an opinion on this type of analysis is going to differ for any number of reasons. Judging interpretation must take into account the possibilities that anyone may see the same thing in a slightly different manner. The reasons for seeing it differently are countless and alot depends on human nature and what is going on it someone elses mindset. If you want a good lesson on Elliot Wave Theory go to www.worldcupadvisor.com/wcu.asp and there are four videos that will guide you through the novice stage to some advanced interpretation. If you can stay the course through to completion of all 4 videos you'll come away scratching your head and thinking why would anyone even try to use this. It can be a very complicated scenario an no one can say this is how it has to be. At best it's learning the theory an adapting it to your needs and style. If your adaptation works for you and your analysis provides winning setups and trades all the better. Spike has tried to supply a view of EW in a simpllified manner that will provide someone that doesn't know anything about it a chance to understand some of the basics that one might look for in using it to find profitable setups and make a few bucks. Whether or not it is perfect in every respect as to how Elliot wanted it to be used or interpreted will have to be judged by anyone who reads his posts an may or may not use that info to their benefit. I for one would not take anyones confirmation or critisism of his point of view as the final word without delving into a study of the theory for myself. The bottom line is that if something works and provides good opportunities regardless of how perfectly it holds to the original concepts or theory then why not make use of it while going out and learning more about it for yourself.