Bitcoin by Ross #11: Elliott Wave Geeks


Bitcoin by Ross #11: Elliott Wave Geeks

Bitcoin By Ross #11

I was told there were some questions about my wave labels in BbR #9, notably the intermediate subwaves of waves Ⓑ and Ⓒ of II. If you aren’t an Elliott Wave geek, you can safely skip this. Or, if you want to become an Elliott Wave geek, jump right in!

Taken out of context, wave Ⓑ could look impulsive at first glance. The 3rd wave extension in wave (C) makes wave (C) dominate the whole structure. Wave (C) is an impulse, so the whole thing starts looking impulsive. One could label (A) as (1), (B) as (2), 4 of (C) as (4) and 5 of (C) as (5). However, to me, this looks very ugly in the cycle-degree superstructure. Wave Ⓐ would have to be seen as a puny wave II that did not match the psychological extreme of wave I. Or, if you took the labels down two degrees, interpreting Ⓐ as (4) and Ⓑ as 1 of (5), the waves look way too massive to be of intermediate and minor degree. Given the choice between the three, the way I labeled Ⓑ in BbR #9 seems best.

Regarding the subwaves of wave (C), someone correctly pointed out that according to orthodox Elliott Wave Theory, there is no 3–3–3 correction. A zig-zag is 5–3–5, a flat is 3–3–5, and a triangle is 3–3–3–3–3. You can also have double (and triple) 3s in which two (or three) of the above three structures are connected by one (or two) of those structures. In that case, instead of labeling the correction A-B-C, it is labeled W-X-Y (or in the case of a triple: W-X-Y-X-Z) with W and Y (and Z) being the “3s” and the Xs being the connecting waves.

In practice, there is no difference between a double 3 with two flats connected by a zig-zag for example and a 3–3–3 structure, except you have to use the XYZ labels.

I see no reason to make the distinction and find the XYZ labeling confuses more than it illuminates. To me, it makes more sense and is easier to follow if you use ABC labeling for double 3s, so I have opted to do that here. Still, my labeling of the wave (C) substructure was only tentative in BbR #9, so it may turn out that wave II is an orthodox flat, and wave (C) will subdivide into 5. Time will tell.


Write a comment

    Write a Comment

    view all comments
    Read before write a comment! Read the guidelines