|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
All, please understand, "we" are not arguing view points here (Scot, Steve
and any others that have expressed "their" view points on bonds and I
welcome that), "we" are just trying to figure out what the major trend is in
bonds is here, maybe a bigger picture is unfolding and "let us all" get on
the right side of it.
I was offering up what one of the software packages I utilize was
"potentially seeing". This is "not" a software admonishment, counts can
change and do sometimes more than I would like, but this is a discussion on
direction . .. . not software, hopefully understood. I am interested in
other opinions particularly if they are backup by some substance. One
interesting fact is when counts do change (for instance wave 5's changing
to wave 3's), you are still on the right side of the market for the next
trade and with proper money management still make $$$.
I see bonds hit 97-23 in the night session as I write this, lets continue
the dialog.
don ewers
----- Original Message -----
From: "t-bondtrader" <t-bondtrader@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 3:55 AM
Subject: [RT] Re: US Bonds weekly
> While all this may pan out, this is a very poor EW count. EW is shaky
> enough as it, but one must at least use this method correctly. Your 2
> lasts for five weeks and your 4 for 32, hardly the same magnitude.
>
> >From the above statement, Earl Adamy says:
>
> "...... The moderators seem to feel that free speech takes precedence over
> civility."
>
>
> Just what was uncivil about that statement? Surely, from Scot's
analysis,
> it was a matter of his opinion, which he is entitled to put to the list
and
> many on the list will no doubt benefit from what he has said. After all,
> while many do not think that EW has much predictive power, but is good at
> seeing where the market has been and might go eventually, it does have a
> set of rules, doesn't it? EW does have major and minor counts, doesn't
it?
> Presumably one has to compare like with like. doesn't one?
>
> The comment was, as I see it, on the way the count was being made against
> the rules that most EW practitioners would expect the count to be made?
> Yes? No? Scot was simply pointing out what he thought and as far as I
can
> make out, did it in a very civil manner. What exactly is your beef?
>
>
> Bill Eykyn
> t-bondtrader@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
|