You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Bitcoin Technical Analysis: The Battle Rages On...
Hi @itzroyyyy. The short answer is no for many reasons. If the E wave was instead a wave 4 as you suggest, that would make the B wave a wave 1. That would mean wave 4 extended beyond the start of wave 1...which is an invalid count or a failed wave. Either way, it doesn't work. There are many other reasons, but that's the most obvious. Hope that makes since.
oh ok gotcha. i was looking at tradedevils count, he had your B as (iii), your CDE was labeled ABC, C being the (iv), and then start down to (v). i see this going either way for sure.
Sorry...I didn't realize you were referring to the larger primary waves. Yes, every 5 wave set is part of a larger primary wave. Sam from trade devils is a great guy and a great trader. His count had bitcoin in an ABC expanded flat. While I like Sam's TA, I disagree this time due to the perfect pattern of what appears to be Bulkowski's wedge. I think it HAS to be counted as an expanding, ABCDE triangle. That said, the truth is, our counts are pretty much the same.
My bearish 5 waves down scenario are sub-waves of a larger primary wave 5. Where Sam and I differ is on where the primary wave 3 ends and the primary wave 4 begins. We both agree on the ending point of primary wave 4...even though I only listed the sub-waves above. That said, from this point, our bearish counts are pretty much the same. Hope that makes since.