|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Don, I looked at the AGET chart for csco and that mumbo jumbo of Elliot counts, as so
marked, has no meaning. I'm sorry to be negative, but all it looks like to me is an
afterthought to make sense out of random pattern -- no different than trying to read
tea leaves. Also, the OSC at the bottom also seems to offer no predictable outcome. I
would like to ascertain from AGET users is whether the system has merit. In other
words, did AGET give any indication of the initial csco drop in early 2000 or when it
really started to tank in late 2000; and, did it get close to predicting the ensuing
carnage? The csco chart that you had attached also showed some slash lines in blue,
green and red that are predicting the next possible outcome. If you were to look back
at previous drawings of those lines, how often has AGET been correct in drawing those
lines?
I went to a few AGET seminars and in the last one I brought a friend who wasn't too
diplomatic and kept pressing a representative to predict what might happen to a stock
she owned. If you ever wanted to see a sales rep. squirm, you should have been there.
However, AGET was showing a modest gain for the stock we were examining, but the stock
now in the sewer. So, if you can give your input on the performance of AGET, I would
appreciate it -- but be careful, there are libel laws ;-).
Ralph Volpe
Don Ewers wrote:
> Lenny,
> I agree with your weekly count.
>
> Using AGET weekly charts, after "parobolic" moves, will almost always
> initially label the correction downward wave 3 due to the depth of the 5/35
> oscillator (likely on the way up also if the 5/35 never reaches zero). It
> makes sense to look at them using the 5/17 oscillator that shows the
> internal count of these severe pullbacks, so thanks for the suggestion.
>
> If one goes to the current daily chart this gives a 1-2-3 count up off the
> bottom so "TV" a wave 4 pullback is likely at some point here (this whole
> sequence may be relabeled a 1-2 eventually if the stock continues to move
> higher thereafter)? If one looks back to April-June another 1-2-3-4 count
> up occurred off the low, but since there was no "credible" minor wave 4" at
> that point, that rally was assumed to be just that, and that lower minor
> wave 5 lows would follow, (which in fact has now occured) which stresses why
> I like to look for the "good" minor wave 4 before assuming a 5 wave sequence
> is complete (the first one is frequently a fake out and only a minor wave 4
> of wave 5)? I think this is the part that can frustrate early users of the
> software until they "read between the lines at times" (ie the imfamous count
> change).
>
> Lenny, I have showed both of the retracements (normal fib from wave 2 and
> from wave 1) you mentioned. I have found just the wave 3 retracement quite
> accurate though and only use the full wave 1- wave 3 retracements if the
> wave 4 red channel is exceeded, since wave 4 should be correcting only wave
> 3 only (wave 1 was corrected by wave 2). I see some confluence, so lets see
> how it works out (assuming CSCO recent high starts a correction here).
> don ewers
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Need new boots for winter? Looking for a perfect gift for your shoe loving friends?
Zappos.com is the perfect fit for all your shoe needs!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/3wM6yD/QrSDAA/ySSFAA/zMEolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|