Hi Jim,
Thanks for opening this Forum to your students and giving us an opportunity to show our charts and share our ideas.
Here is a chart of todays ABCD's in the russell. I will post a context chart later. Today was one of those days where the market changes direction on Jim's unique Fib numbers, Had you been trading with standard fib numbers you may not have noticed these PTA's. Is it me or is .564 becomming more and more prevalent?
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
OK, now put that 60-minute set on there so the ML and upper // are visible, and add an 'adjusted' set on from 10:30 to 11:06, 'locked' at 14:05 (eastern times). Lastly, draw a trendline in from the 1/9 and 1/19 lows. Now how does that look?
JI
jimkane
Rep: 3,058
Posts: 33,089
Ex-act-ly. See how that smaller set gave the 2.5 point bounce up, and then another one of 1.6, right off the line, to set up your highlighted 4-Point CP? Want some more fun? Add a set for that .447 rollover. Which one? Use the run up from Friday's low at 12:30 to the high, and put division lines on the set. How's that for a potential shorting spot?
DU
Duane
Rep: 100
Posts: 1,095
Wow What a great day for Kane Traders!! With Jims help I was able to set up a trade premiss for to today that work to the "T" Check out the ABCD into the trendline that Jim had me draw. The action could not get much better than this!! Thank Jim!
MR
mreiserer
Rep: 110
Posts: 2,220
Hi Duane,
I think Elliot Wave is useful when it comes to recognizing wheter a 'wave' is impulsive or corrective and what it might mean in the overall context of things. The Wave count itself gets a little too abstract for me, because I see wave counts all over the place and I could hardly make myself belief in such as a trade premise. If an area shows up where a lot of stuff converges and on top of that there is added confirmation via a clear distinguishable Wave count (like Jim has shown in some of his examples) I view it as an added plus.
I think Elliot Wave is useful when it comes to recognizing wheter a 'wave' is impulsive or corrective and what it might mean in the overall context of things. The Wave count itself gets a little too abstract for me, because I see wave counts all over the place and I could hardly make myself belief in such as a trade premise. If an area shows up where a lot of stuff converges and on top of that there is added confirmation via a clear distinguishable Wave count (like Jim has shown in some of his examples) I view it as an added plus.








