[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RT] Fractal and Armstrong's 1.075 year cycle and April 16, 2009 PEI date
|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
|
That is pretty much what I inferred from his
examples although a parent sometimes occurred after a child..
I have received a reply to my email and will
continue the dialogue with him. Thanks for the lead.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 5:50
PM
Subject: RE: [RT] Fractal and Armstrong's
1.075 year cycle and April 16, 2009 PEI date
Thanks to
you. Hank is pretty spotty about updating this website. I?ve had
several exchanges with him on different websites we frequent. His
?system? is very simple from what little I see of it but it might be more than
I expect. But a couple of the urgent ?sell nows? that one board that I
frequented back in the fall were 10s on a scale of 1 to 10. What I?ve
observed as his method is that a child fractal follows closely if not
contiguously from the parent but at a visibly higher or lower degree of
trend. Hank numbers each component wave of the parent and, when visibly
discernable, fits the count to the suspected child fractal which, again, is
invariably at a higher or lower degree of trend (Mandelbrott would
approve). When enough replicating changes in trend of matching relative
magnitude (each wave should be proportional to the fractal in which in which
it occurs) have similarly occurred in the child as occurred in the parent, he
infers the next child leg. Say he identifies a parent with 9 waves (he
actually labels the pivot points), he then identifies at least 5 waves in the
child or until he is satisfied, and then trades the next several waves of the
child presuming they will replicate the parent.
My allusion
to the October 2007 to March 2008 fractal versus the currently competing
(completed) ?wave 3? fractal is that last wave 5 leg down. It just
doesn?t finish correctly (?no happy ending?). I can count in the parent
and the child, as you?d expect for an EW wave 1 and 3, entirely similar
structure right down to wave 4 triangles in each (see my charts of the two
triangles). Point ?e? of the two triangles are exactly (within 1 day of)
an Armstrong 1.075 year apart. EXCEPT, that final wave 5 is not there
and there remains time to complete it by Armstrong?s turn date of April
16. It would make a great story if it occurred?..what with Neely,
Prechter and every other bear having already capitulated. If what I?m
fantasizing is correct, today should have been the high and there will be some
crushing bull traps at expected Fib levels on the way down to new lows for the
year on April 16 or thereabouts. Time for a lithium
break.
I believe I
have read portions of your Impulse Theory but it?s about like me studying
Neely?s stuff?.just too much information. It?s easy to see the impact of
?too much information? when you take a look at Charles Barclays golf
swing. I will revisit your methodology in the future and
thanks,
Jim
From: realtraders@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:realtraders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim
White
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 8:23 PM
To:
realtraders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [RT] Fractal and
Armstrong's 1.075 year cycle and April 16, 2009 PEI
date
Of course I am quite familiar
with Elliott Wave methodology but find it too unreliable as a basis for
trading. It seems no two Elliotticians can ever agree on wave
count.
Thank you for the Wernicki
web site reference however I must take exception to his statement of being the
first and only fractal forecasting firm in the world since I have been doing
it since 1998. I would love to read about his approach but find no descriptive
material on the web site. Are you aware of any? Perhaps I will email
him.
My work and basic approach (
"A New Paradigm...") can be reviewed at my web site
PivotTrader.com
My forecasting is based on my
"Near ImpulseTheory" with non linear projections of impulse into the future. I
have focused my efforts on creating highly reliable trading tools based on my
methodology with an objective of identifying turning points within one bar of
the pivot..
Thanks again for the
reference - I look forward to learning more.
Jim White
Pivot Research
& Trading Co.
PivotTrader.com
----- Original Message
-----
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 4:28
PM
Subject: RE: [RT] Fractal and Armstrong's 1.075 year cycle
and April 16, 2009 PEI date
Too much
typing too little proofing. See cap corrections.
Again,
Elliott Waves are a method of identifying self similar fractals. I
cannot imagine that you have not studied Elliott Waves if you?ve developed a
fractal system. You could spend weeks on Elliott Wave methodology and
it?s been around with R.N. Elliott first identified its ?rules? and Robert
Prechter HAS popularized its use in the ?70s via ?Elliott Wave
Principles.?
The one
fractal practitioner who ?headlines? his work as more fractal geometry than
EW and with whom I have direct familiarity is Hank Wernicki. He
frequents Yelnick?s site and has a site at http://www.elliottfractals.com/.
During the rapid decline period of August 2008 to November 2008, he had some
fractal calls relying more upon his methodology than EW that SUCCEEDED
within minutes of his prediction. They were spooky correct. Huge
moves. More recently, his hand has gone cold, having called for a
continuation of the downtrend about 2 weeks ago?.
Market analogs are OFTEN
CONSIDERED, themselves, FRACTALS. Most often they?re visual and not
discovered by a system for that purpose, but many analysts follow
analogs. You can?t help but read the comparison charts to prior bears,
etc. Many analysts reduce their analysis to correlation statistics and
keep weekly running tabs on correlation (Larry Tomlinson?s service is an
example).
Again, my primary
concentration (as a hobbyist and amateur) is Elliott Waves which is a system
of recognizing fractal generation and execution. What might your
system look like conceptually?
Jim
From: realtraders@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:realtraders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim
White
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 6:07 PM
To:
realtraders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [RT] Fractal
and Armstrong's 1.075 year cycle and April 16, 2009 PEI
date
I am familiar with
Mandelbrot's work on unifractals and multifractals and other than my own non
linear model and use of fractals, I was not aware of anyone else making a
practical application to trading. If you could provide more detailed
references as to where this approach originated and is described, I would
appreciate it.
----- Original Message
-----
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 2:28
PM
Subject:
RE: [RT] Fractal and Armstrong's 1.075 year cycle and April 16, 2009 PEI
date
A self
organizing geometric form. Recognizing the waves of the parent
fractal and locating the initial waves of a child fractal allows you to
enter a trade that anticipates the last waves of the child fractal with
higher probability. Benoit Mandelbrot (Nobel mathematician),
among others, claims chaos theory and non linear systems can only be
anticipated via fractal geometry. Elliott Wave methodology is a
method of anticipating fractal generation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal
http://www.amazon.com/Mis-behavior-Markets-Benoit-Mandelbrot/dp/0465043550
http://www.economymodels.com/factalmarkets.asp
http://www.tradingfives.com/articles/elliott-wave-fractals.html
There are
hundreds of references. There are websites dedicated to fractal
recognition and trading.
From: realtraders@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:realtraders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim
White
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 4:39 PM
To:
realtraders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [RT] Fractal
and Armstrong's 1.075 year cycle and April 16, 2009 PEI
date
Could you please provide
the definition of the "fractal" relative to market action and a reference
for its use in market analysis.
----- Original Message
-----
Sent:
Thursday, March 26, 2009 10:51 AM
Subject: [RT] Fractal and Armstrong's 1.075 year cycle
and April 16, 2009 PEI date
I?ve been following a fractal the move from October
11, 2007 ?wave 1? to March 10, 2008 being the parent of the fractal
(parent) of the wave from June 2008 to present (child) in QQQQs.
If you look at the last small portion of 2008 parent fractal, you see a
clear triangle and then a quick wave 5 to end that wave on March 17,
2008. Here?s the last days of the 2008 parent fractal:
Here?s the thought. If you count
backwards exactly one Armstrong interval of 1.075 years (per ?It?s Just
Time? page 25) from today, March 26, 2009, you get February 27,
2008. That is point 4 e on the above chart. That implies
Robert?s chart that calls for the following end of the child fractal is
occurring today, March 26, 2009..
Now, do one more little test. I?m suggesting
the mythical wave 5 ends on April 16, 2009 which is Armstrong?s PEI
date. Now, subtract 1.075 years from April 16, 2009 and you get
March 19, 2008. Allowing 1 day for rounding (1.075 years is
392.375 days), then you?re within 1 days of the end of the parent
fractal?s wave or point 5 of 5 on the first chart.
One last thing. March 26, 2009 is a McHugh Phi
change in trend date. Except for his March 13, 2009 Phi date, they
have been very accurate over the course of this bear.
Just some thoughts in case it, as improbable as it
is, does
occur.
__._,_.___
![]()
__,_._,___
|
|
|
|
|