Ewj: elliott wave

[elovemer]

..... don't know what orthodox means here....high-falutin language don't interest this here critter....

.... but i guess we will have to wait and see .... maybe a long wait
.... either count .... up

Quote from mu200411:
elovemer,
I think the Orthodox
mu.

 

[mu200411]

Orthodox Top = True Top of Wave 5 which is lower than the Unorthodox Top of Wave B.
Elliott called the 1928 top an Orthodox Top and the 1929 irregular top the B Wave

Elliott wave principle: key to market behavior -
Google Books by Alfred John Frost, Robert Rougelot Prechter - 1998 - Business & Economics - 244 page
It should be mentioned again that Elliott always interpreted 1928 as the [Bthodox top[/B] wave (III), with the 1929 peak marking an irregular top. ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=0932750435...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=th&source=hp&q=Elliott+"Orthodox+top"&meta=&aq=f&oq=

critter
Did you mean: critter , Critters , Critters (film series), Critters (1986 Science Fiction Film), The Critters , List of Batman animated episodes More...

Dictionary: crit·ter (krĭt'ər)

n. Informal.
A living creature.
A domestic animal, especially a cow, horse, or mule.
A person.
[Alteration of CREATURE.]

REGIONAL NOTE Critter, a pronunciation spelling of creature, actually reflects a pronunciation that would have been very familiar to Shakespeare: 16th- and 17th-century English had not yet begun to pronounce the –ture suffix with its modern (ch) sound. This archaic pronunciation still exists in American critter and in Irish creature, pronounced (krâ'tŭr) and used in the same senses as the American word. The most common meaning of critter is “a living creature,” whether wild or domestic; it also can mean “a child” when used as a term of sympathetic endearment, or it can mean “an unfortunate person.” In old-fashioned speech, critter and beast denoted a large domestic animal. The more restricted senses “a cow,” “a horse,” or “a mule” are still characteristic of the speech in specific regions of the United States. The use of critter among younger speakers almost always carries with it a jocular or informal connotation.
http://www.answers.com/topic/critter

 

[mu200411]

http://books.google.com/books?id=y7...m=2#v=onepage&q=Elliott "Orthodox top"&f=true

Elliott wave principle: key to market behavior -
Google Books by Alfred John Frost, Robert Rougelot Prechter - 1998 - Business & Economics - 244 pages
It should be mentioned again that Elliott always interpreted 1928 as the orthodox top of wave (III), with the 1929 peak marking an irregular top. ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=0932750435...

 

[mu200411]

Fifth subwave v of fifth wave 3)3.1:5 .
What's next .
Note: Be-aware of the red lines :eek: .

 

[elovemer]

..... like i said..
.... the language is of no importance.... to me anyway....

...... what makes you choose the first top as the real top ?
.... what makes you favor the 2nd top as a B wave ?


P.S. you like language do you ? :0)

Quote from mu200411:
Orthodox Top = True Top

 

[mu200411]

...2007=B ......no SPX < 672 ........b4 SPX 15,000 .
...2007=A ......no SPX > 1260 ......b4 SPX 515
T's ........OK ......... .


..... 2000 = RT <- 2007 ^v= ..... IZF ... div ... ...etc.

... DJI 2003 - 2007 ~ a 3 ........ :eek: .
....... -> 2007 a B ........ .

 

[Ckessler]

Mu200411, What is the basis for these outlandish calls? two completely different counts, neither of which coincide with the experts in the field, do you have any basis or did you just randomly assign counts to particular peaks?

I'm brand new to this forum and all I seem to see is disagreements with Prechter.. why would all of you go against the expert in the field?

 

[mu200411]

Ckessler,
Time will tell
mu.

Note: If you believe the experts, don't waste your time here.
Our practice here is:
Put up your call, with some explanation if possible.
The Market will show you're rigth or wrong in a few minutes,
in a few hours, in a few days, in a few weeks, in a few months,
in a few years, in a few decades, in a few centuries, in a few millenniums, in a few million years or in a few ...............
Acknowledge the good calls.
Forget the bad calls.

P.S.
If you really like to know my reasoning:
SPX rose 22.36 times or 2236% in supercycle V]III) from 1974 - 2000.
If supercycle V]V) began on March 6, 2009, a measured move will bring us to SPX 15,000 in 26 years or 2035.

 

[mu200411]

A randomly assigned count will send DJI to 130,000 in 26 years (2035 A.D.) or 160,000 in 33 years (2042 A.D.)

 

[mgabriel01]

There are no bad calls, or good calls
There are only chumps who don't do their own thinking

Quote from mu200411:

Ckessler,
Time will tell
mu.

Note: If you believe the experts, don't waste your time here.
Our practice here is:
Put up your call, with some explanation if possible.
The Market will show you're rigth or wrong in a few minutes,
in a few hours, in a few days, in a few weeks, in a few months,
in a few years, in a few decades, in a few centuries, in a few millenniums, in a few million years or in a few ...............
Acknowledge the good calls.
Forget the bad calls.

P.S.
If you really like to know my reasoning:
SPX rose 22.36 times or 2236% in supercycle V]III) from 1974 - 2000.
If supercycle V]V) began on March 6, 2009, a measured move will bring us to SPX 15,000 in 26 years or 2035.