بایگانی برچسب برای: Hossein Heidarpour

پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-71

(71) New Tips & Hints

While plotting highs/lows, only price is used, but the time difference between them is not. Do you think it is of no use when and at what time highs/lows occurred. And if you think they are useful, please tell us how it can be used to detect the structure of monowaves?

ANSWER:

This question was sent in by Pradeep Mehta of India. I’m surprised this is the first time I have received this question. It brings up an issue that perplexed me the first few years of my career. 

During the course of a day (or any time frame viewed on a bar chart), the high and low seen could have happened in the first minute, the last minute, the first hour, the last hour, mid day or thousands of other possibilities. In essence, Pradeep is asking why we plot the high and low of a day (or any time frame) as if they occurred exactly the same time apart. 

I wrestled with this idea when I began studying wave theory and assumed plotting the high and low of a day at the exact time they occurred would work better than spacing them at equal distances apart. Keep in mind, when you use bar charts (instead of NEoWave charts) to do wave analysis, you are making a far graver mistake – you are assuming the impossible, that the high and low of a particular day occurred simultaneously! 

After years of working with various forms of plotting (bar charts, average of the high and low, close-only, accurate time plotting like that mentioned above and simply plotting the high and low equally distanced apart), I found the last option far superior to the others. It is not clear to me why more accurate time-based plots do not work better, but they don’t, so I gave them up 20 years ago. NEoWave rules and guidelines work best when the highest high and lowest low of any repetitive time frame are plotted in the order they occurred and spaced at equal distance from each other.

/0 دیدگاه /توسط
پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-70

(70) New Tips & Hints

Why is the NEoWave TRADING service separate from the NEoWave FORECASTING service. Isn’t the purpose of both to successfully trade markets?

ANSWER:

This is one of the most important questions ever asked on this forum, sent in anonymously from an email address most likely located in the United States. 

For the first 15 years of my career, when my sole focus was super-detailed, accurate wave analysis, the WaveWatch service did not separate trading advice from wave analysis. The complex nature of that service prompted many customers to request I simplify all the “wave talk” and focus on “bottom line” trading tactics. At the same time, my more successful, professional customers were asking I provide my unique, NEoWave analysis without all the trading details to distract them from their own methodology. That is when I decided to separate NEoWave into two, distinct services – Trading advice and Chart analysis (Forecasting) – which allowed me to address the needs of two, unique market participant categories. 

In just the last 5 years, I realized the division of my service into two parts was the beginning of a paradigm shift in my thinking and approach to markets. It was slowly becoming clear to me that accurate market analysis had virtually no relation to successful trading and vice versa. That profound realization is the nucleus of what I’m confident will become a revolution in the field of technical analysis – NEELY RIVER THEORY. 

In 1990, with the introduction of MASTERING ELLIOTT WAVE, I presented what eventually came to be known as NEoWave – a new, logical foundation for the field of wave analysis and forecasting, allowing for more objective, scientific and accurate results. Similar to what NEoWave did for the field of wave analysis, NEELY RIVER THEORY will do in the realm of real-time trading. It presents the first, logical, scientific, objective, step-by-step, non-forecasting, non-mathematical approach to trading and investing ever devised.
/0 دیدگاه /توسط
پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-69

(69) New Tips & Hints

How do you differentiate between the end of a Contracting Triangle and an ongoing Diametric or Symmetrical?

ANSWER:

This question is the composite of several questions I have received the last few months. The time and price consumption of the waves during the contraction is the key. If wave-c is more than 61.8% of wave-a and wave-e is more than 61.8% of wave-c, that is a big clue. If the time and complexity of all the waves is more similar than different, a Triangle is very unlikely. Also, following the e-wave of a Triangle, the market should start moving as fast (if not faster) than the violent move during wave-a. If the market proceeds in a fashion similar to that seen during the other waves, then a Diametric or Symmetrical is a certainty.

/0 دیدگاه /توسط
پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-68

(68) New Tips & Hints

In other publications I frequently see wave counts such as 1-2, i-ii, 1-2, followed by a 3rd of a 3rd Extension. How come you rarely have that in your NEoWave Chart and Trading services?

ANSWER:

NEoWave theory includes many rules and guidelines not found in orthodox Elliott Wave. These rules and guidelines bring a new level of regidity, objectivity, logic, and as a result, dependability to the study and identification of wave patterns. Without such regidity, wave analysis becomes a matter of opinion instead of “fact.” 

In most cases, when you see someone’s wave count that possesses a repetitive series of 1’s and 2’s prior to a 3rd of a 3rd “explosion,” there are many logical inconsistencies. More often than not, you will find lower degree 1’s and 2’s taking more time, price and complexity than higher degree 1’s and 2’s. By definition, this is logically untenable. In addition, such counts usually place smaller 2-waves outside the larger 0-B or 2-4 trendline. Again, a difficult situation to justify. 

If you want your counts to be consistently reliable, without the need for constant revision or complete alteration, you must make sure smaller 1’s and 2’s take less time, price and complexity than larger 1’s and 2’s.

/0 دیدگاه /توسط
پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-67

(67) New Tips & Hints

Is there a FLAT where the complexity of leg “a” is greater than leg “b” and leg “c”?

ANSWER:

This concept is discussed extensively in Mastering Elliott Wave. Precise Complexity measurement is part of NEoWave theory, but not part of orthodox Elliott Wave. 

Wave-a of a Flat is the start of a new trend, so it tends to be violent. Wave-b of a Flat is a “correction” of that new trend. Corrections, as a rule, are nearly always more complex and time consuming than the trending segments of a pattern (except in Terminal formation). This is especially true when comparing the time and complexity of a correction going with the trend as opposed to one going against the trend. Consequently, the a-wave of a Flat must always take less time than wave-b. Since a crucial aspect of time is complexity development, that makes it impossible for wave-b to subdivide less than wave-a in a Flat. If you see wave-b take less time and complexity than wave-a, a Triangle, Diametric or Symmetrical pattern is forming, not a Flat. 

Wave-c in a Flat will take either 50% of the total time and complexity consumed by waves-a and b combined or it will take approximately 100$ of the time and complexity of waves-a and b combined.

/0 دیدگاه /توسط
پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-66

(66) New Tips & Hints

is there any way of determaining the end of the 5th wave of a 5th Extension Impulsion (Terminal or Trending) before the break of the 2-4 trendline?

ANSWER:

The problem with 5th Extensions is wave-5 nearly always travels further and faster than expected, creating a difficult and dangerous trading environment. This great trading question was sent in by long-term U.S. subscriber and friend Richard Campo. 

In 1st and 3rd Extension Impulsions, waiting for a break of the 2-4 trendline does not require you give up much of the new trend. Unfortunately, following a 5th Extension (where wave-5 is the longest move), waiting for the 2-4 trendline to be reached would mean missing out on a large segment of the new trend. 

So, how should you manage entry into a 5th Extension environment. First and foremost, do NOT attempt to pick the end of the extension. Doing so could mean getting caught in the final, violent, upside or downside gap opening that usually occurs at the end of such patterns. Financially speaking, picking the wrong moment to “sell the top” of a 5th Extension advance (or the bottom of a decline) could be your worst trading decision of your life. 

To avoid a serious reduction in trading capital, these are the steps you must take to protect yourself and increase your chances of being in when the large, counter-trend move begins. First, make sure wave-5 is longer than wave-3 and that ALL NEoWave price, time and complexity requirements are fully met. Next, wait till you experience an “oh my God” feeling created during the final, nearly vertical market advance or decline. At that point wave-5 will be at least 161.8% of wave-1, wave-3 or waves-1 and 3 combined. If that condition is met, measure the largest, counter-trend price move during the formation of wave-5. If wave-5 is advancing, subtract that amount from the highest price reached by wave-5 (the opposite applies for a declining 5th wave). Increase that amount by 1-tick and place an order to enter the market in the opposite direction of the 5th Extension. If the order is filled, immediately place a stop at the end of wave-5. If the order is not filled and the 5th extension grows larger, repeat the above process until a correction larger than any seen during the development of wave-5 takes place. Once that occurs, the 5th Extension should be over. 

You may have to attempt the above process twice before the real trend begins (this occurs when the 5th Extension is itself a 5th Extension), but once in, the trade will pay off handsomely. This is the strategy I used in the Gold market at the 2006 high to catch the large decline that followed.

/0 دیدگاه /توسط