Null hypotheses, not many people understand that principle Jackozy, maybe you were/are a good scientist? If not, maybe you should have been.

Hi F4T,

I like the "wave therapists" name - seems appropriate somehow lol!

Yes, I do use Fibs with my wave targets. IMHO Fibs are actually derived from the initial conditions assumed by Elliott when he did his research so the 2 methods are inter-dependent as far as I'm concerned.

I should also say that I don't only use EWT. I use all the TA methods I'm aware of and then look for a convergence between these differing analyses; the more methods that point to the same conclusion, the more confidence I get for the trade.

On that note, I totally agree with your view and have held that same expectation for quite a while now. I always look for reasons I could be wrong (rather than always looking for reasons I'm right) and I haven't seen any yet on this particular analysis. I'm still looking though.

PS Please post your chart - I'd like to see it!

My take is still a very clear short term H&S, and the neckline was broken yesterday with a close below it, so I expect a relatively quick retrace below 200 if it plays out correctly. Money flow index and stochastic also now heading south. A lower close today will also probably give a negative tick on MACD.

Some support to be broken at 202/203 with the MA200 and MA20 on the way down.

Correction to my last post here. The rising trendline from 164 was only broken yesterday. I took a quick reading off the iii javachart the other day, which as, i should have known, was woefully inaccurate. Apologies for that.

Likely targets are the 50% retracement level of the 161 move at 195 or 61.8% fib at 186/187, the 186/187 area also being horizontal support from 12.12.12. My orders are in at the 187/188 level having closed my 162 purchases at 220+.

Funny that the conclusion is the same as made by the wave therapists but by a different method. Jackozy, do you use retracement levels and fibs for your wave targets?

I won't post my chart because people will want to redraw it

F4T

PS: Also note that S&P500 touched 1505 out of cash play yesterday, then retraced. I would like to see it do so in market hours to create a possible top. All indices overextended IMO.

screencast.com/t/dgV8kdQCl




This continues to follow a well forcast path with completion of the next wave expected to be between 195 and 185.

Short term H&S forming on the daily, neckline at ~211. A close below this points to sub 200 once again. Rising trendline from 164 also breached today.

Well, the 203 bounce happened at 207 but sp failed to break the 217.50 resistance, which was bearish.

S&P500 will hit a wall at 1505 soon spelling a retrace in all markets IMO. Let's see.

GL
F4T

Hi Jackozy,

sp pierced / bounced off 208/209, the 61.8% fib retracement of the last 203 move yesterday. I expect to see 203 by wednesday personally as it was pierced and the reversal is still in process.

F4T
Jackozy wrote:

Tradesmarter wrote:
hi tradesmarter
Your not a muppet ,I moved your post as it was in the general chit chat posts for GKP from last week.
Sorry about that.

Yep, agree with that. I'm also expecting a bounce from 203p to test 215/217 before a wave C down to 195/187.

Beyond that I also agree that 230p is probably the most important price level for GKP now and I expect it to provide resistance and support a number of times assuming that GKP continues long enough for it to play out.

Agree that 202/203 is likely target for a bounce per my Friday post, being MA200 and horizontal support from 21.11.12. I would limit any initial bounce to 217.50 though as that will need cracking again. 230 will wait until Feb IMO.

The top reversal pattern has played out beautifully going into this week.

F4T

surpised there where no charts on this thread...anyway I was hoping for 141 to "invest" and missed the 161 be quick trade....I do think a pullback to 202 likely, but think 260 test will be met in due course. (Edit..muppat how did I not see the one just below from Mr Jackozy!)..either way we both seem to think 203 offers a bounce trade

Hi twl2009,

No change to my analysis so far as it's playing out almost perfectly. I'm expecting the gap to get filled after this correction as I think it's too late this time around. There was plenty of time for the bulls to push it up but they didn't. There's also been a lower high on the hourly chart which suggests another failed attempt. I think it's all quite clear on this hourly chart:



dl.dropbox.com/u/20815047/GKPhourly17_01_13.gif

Which leaves the question where next.
Back up to try and close the gap or back down to test 217 again.
Any ideas?
Jackozy how does this fit with the EWT you posted before?

AdeMcG, I wasn't having a dig at you for gloating mate. I like your contributions here.

Remo, good idea to have a fundamental section where the stargazers can go


Well, sp only made 228 before the retrace I expected to minimum 217. Bounced off 50% retrace of 203 move. I'm very surprised it didn't spike first thing to that mark though. It seems that the remaining bulls lost their nerve and the city boys didn't bring it up a little to tempt them.

It only tested the bottom of the gap (didn't close it), so I expect it to have another go in the near future. Once hit I can see MA200 becoming support before month end.

F4T

There is no Risk to be controlled on a free position, but I know where you are coming from
and do you have a link to a free e-book of the afore mentioned publication?

EVERYBODY STOP
Read Hedge Fund Market Wizards, How winning traders win. By Jack D. Schwager

I've read all of his other books too. Top reads.

The biggest thing I take away from all of them is RISK Control.

Also, if you have a fundamental argument/hypothesis , you can use that for a long term idea. TA can aide you to get the best entry.

RISK and position sizing controls, loss and most of all emotions.

Combine Fundamentals, Technical Analysis, RISK Control and Emotions and you are a super star trader...
Food4Thought wrote:

Food4thought
There is a fundamental section in the forums. If people want to put fundamentals then its fine.
Yes its a TA board but i have put a section for the fundamentals although its a small section
A lot of people would like to know about the fundamentals side of things on penny shares. Me personally ,dont care.
Food4Thought wrote:

Hi F4T, anyone who knows my postings from the original Chartsview days will know I was not intending to gloat and only posted the figures as an illustration of what I should have done when it reached 460p, e.g. sell and buy back.

I like your straight talking approach, so don't take my comment as a rebuff of your statement, just a positioning and context exercise to realign your perception of me

Whilst I tend to agree with the Technical points you raise, fundamentals must be borne in mind when it can make a game changer happen.
GKP over the last few years has often fooled many TA experts, only with hindsight have they then seen the full picture, which helps no one in real time.
I say this because if we are all expecting it to hit 230p and retrace, it will likely over shoot this just to spite your charts and theories....lol

Food, I respect your views.
From a strictly TA perspective today could be a critical day.
If the gap closes at 230 and holds above it, then the rise might have more fuel in the tank.
I see that 246p and 260p have been quoted as targets.
Should it spike to 230p in the morning rush and then drop (like it did to 204p just 48 hrs ago), then we're looking at a backtest of 217p at least, possibly overshooting to 210p, and maybe a trip back to both 204p and then 187p on Jacko's wave count.

AdeMcG,

with respect, that is what all the PI crowd were saying when the sp was over 400.

bobbono77,

I disagree with remo(sorry mate to be controvercial again) in that there is no place for fundamental guessing and star gazing on a TA board. Why not keep that for those on the iii circus eh where it belongs?

Also, is it just me but I also dislike posters that like to publicise the monetary side of their profitable trades. It adds no value at all and is just petty gloating.


I think we will see 230 today per my earlier post, if only on a spike.

F$T


AdeMcG wrote:

This share is very popular indeed .....
Just look at how many times it's been viewed.
Lol

bonobo77 wrote:
Hi bonobo
It's good to have a fundamental views as well as that will add to this board.
Feel free to use fundamentals .
It sure can help with penny shares.

a very old chart

wish it was always this easy

Jackozy wrote:
Sorry, been away for a couple of days and missed this!

Surely you remember the good old days where I would post a chart, saying moving my stop up. Others were becoming millionaires and I was thinking, "Must keep Profits" . Then when the charts tumbled for the first time
I was happy to get out.
Box size 1% , 3 box reversal
The charts were provided for free and I trusted the closing prices.

I saw Remo's Metastock blog post in their news letter. Would be great if we could get a template for Metastock so that we are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

I learnt a lot from P&F , Mainly to look LEFT on any chart. Look for the points where price hits multiple times. Works a dream.

I sold the 10000 I bought at 205.25 yesterday for a 20p gain today.
Bit of fun, really.
I can't see any fundamental justification for the sharp rise other than the market putting back some of the value it took away from the start of the court case. But a judgement might not come until May/June, and the politics aren't great right now ... so a lot can happen. Perhaps there are whispers coming from MOL's direction, but the one thing I rule out just now is any thought of an imminent t/o. The conditions in Kurdistan are not right for it yet.

Anyway, sorry to pollute a chart board with a fundamental view, but it does help me see how Jacko's retrace is very possible.

I am a little hesitant to hit the sell button until I see a change in sentiment, even if it pushes through 230p (could be tomorrow) who is prepared to sell just because it has hit a theoretical target?
I would want to see a sign that the buying pressure (over 10 million traded today) has subsided or something to indicate the "smart money" is exiting.

Anyone else got some thoughts on what to look out for, I don't have DMA and I work during the day, so it is difficult to see what is really happening.

All I know is that my free shares (been in since 11p and took my capital out long ago) have had a great run, and I would welcome the chance to bank the profit at the top (for once) and re-buy at a lower level to increase my number of shares.

From Jackozy's thoughts, it could go something like this:

Sell at 230p (gap resistance)
Buy back at 187p (61.8% for a wave 2)

Sell at 298p (peak of Wave 3)
Buy back at 256p (38.2% retrace from 298p to form wave 4)

Sell at 329p (peak of 5th wave)

A working example form my own freebies:

GKP TRADE STRATEGY
Sell 5000 shares @ 230p = £11,500
Buy back @ 187p = 6149 Shares

Sell 6149 shares @298p = £18324
Buy back @ 256p = 7157 Shares

Sell 7157 shares @ 329p = £23,549
Increase = £12,049
% increase = 104.77 %


Alternative Strategy, If held and not traded:

Sell 5000 shares at 329p = £16,450

A bit of trading could potentially net me some £7,099

if only it was this simple !!!

Morning F4T,

Appreciate your comments.

230 is naturally the gap and had served as previous support in October of this year. It would also coincide with the length of the rise from the move up from 163 to 187 (24pts) and if we measure my presumed low of 205 + 24 = 229.

Agree that this move is a little overextended and it would be healthy for some of the heat to come off the indicators.

All the best,
M.

Hi Monkeyz,

why a rise to 229/230? - 217 area has has been tested twice and 3 is an important number in trading, gap is next real target / resistance area and engulfing candle yesterday suggests a further rise.

Why 217? - 217 area has shown resistance in past and on this rise - resistance becomes support.
Why 210? - natural number for an overshoot of 217 IMO,psychological round number, some consolidation there in recent days so makes a good bounce point.

This move from 162 is also a little overextended. It needs to give some back before possibly going higher. The gap is a sensible and strong resistance target to suck in a few more excited PI bulls before smart money reduces.

All IMO of course.
F4T

Hi F4T,

Out of interest what are your reasons for 210/217 based on?

I had an order at 202 this morning - too greedy for my own good! However have since moved this down to 189 based on the original breakout point but also bearing in mind any fibonacci retrace of this particular move up.

I saw Jackozy's posts on iii and tend to agree with his thinking. Although I don't trade based on EWT the move down to 173 was uncanny and if applying a fib extension of the move then wave 3 did not disappoint.

Keen to hear you thoughts,
M.

Next sell point is at gap close 229-230 IMO. I then expect a retrace, possibly as low as 210, but to 217 certainly.

GL all
F4T

So, in fact then I should be quite pleased - when I saw it wasn't taken I managed to get a few at 204.69! Ok - not so bad after all then. Thanks for explaining it all

I had a limit order for 10,000 filled at 205.25

They have DMA for their own orders for sure but for us mortals they run their own book and when the bid was 204 this morning their ask was probably 205.25/205.75 so the best we could have obtained from them was 204.75/205.50 probably and it was all over in a nano second anyway so talk about being quick.

Thanks Richie, again please excuse the dumb question - but if I place an order to buy, (in my case it was with Hargreaves Lansdown) would they not use DMA to process it?

Direct Market Access Anne , thought about it in the past with IG Index but din't go through with it.

Apologies for the naiveté of the the question - DMA??

I had an order in this morning for 204 which wasn't taken either - grrr!!

Hi SRB,

The low bid on the order book was 204.0p though someone sold at 203.0p so you'd have needed DMA to buy at 204.25p I'm afraid.

I had two orders in at 204.25 with two separate companies and neither of them were filled so with you Remo.

bonobo77 wrote: Good prediction mate



This share has bounced of the 203 level perfectly this morning.
Forgot to put my order in as was to busy else where...

Come on guys lets agree to disagree and leave it at that now.

chartsview is a friendly community where everyone is entitled to their own opinion and everyone has their own style of trading, no one person is right, its what works best for you.

Lets put our time and energy in enhancing our trading and finding great trading opportunities.

diver99,

I think you are being a littl over sensitive about your positions. This is a discussion forum. There is no place for petty sarcasm and childish tantrums.

It is a place to trade views and that is exactly what I was doing with Remo before you entered the conversation unconstructively. We had different views, but that is fine. The important thing is what works for the individual. Further, I was trying to flag trading areas and support levels that were clearly missed by posters on here. I was making a positive contribution.

Further, I can assure you that I know the markets very well indeed thank you, both technically and otherwise, and have made a very good living on them for many years.

I wish you GL with whatever positions you have, but please don't belittle others just because you are on a different wavelength and if you do, don't be surprised if some of your own truths are revealed.

F4T

Although not named Nev I also use P&F and found the 2 x 3 on the daily has worked well, aside from the suspect 68p target!



dl.dropbox.com/u/24866576/January%202013...S%20110113%20dpf.gif

On the 1 minute chart the 0.25% x 3 has worked well but you need a bullish or bearish filter (e.g. ichimoku cloud) as it fluctuates quite a bit.



dl.dropbox.com/u/24866576/January%202013...%20110113%201mpf.gif

All the best,
M.

followNev wrote:
Hi Nev,

May I ask...what box sizes did you use?

TIA

diver993 wrote:
Diver, I agree that extended waves can be longer than 161.8% - just look at GKP's move from 10.25p to 131p (which I have as a wave 3) which followed the move from 4.5p to 21.5p for example. However, I think our interpretations of EWT's rules differ slightly thereafter. Wave 3 does not HAVE to be extended at all. It usually is but not always. I've seen planty of occasions where 5th waves are the extended ones (mostly, in fact, in AIM oilers).

I don't mind if my expectations for GKP's move are proved to be wrong by events - my post was purely speculative based on the theory. In any event, if the top of the 5th wave up from 161p does indeed turn our to be 230p (gap resistance) then we'd have a 161-230p move. According to theory, that should then retrace to 187p (61.8% for a wave 2 as the most common) and would give a wave 3 projection of ((230-161) x 1.618) + 187 = 298p. When we look at natural resistance (I mean horizontal ones from price highs here) beyond the obvious one at 260p we see that they're at 280p and 298p. Coincidence?

We therefore have theory predicting a retrace to the last breakout point at 204p before a rise to gap resistance at 230p followed by a retrace to the original breakout point from the 123-low at 187p and then an extended wave 3 up to a strong resistance at 298p. This is all calculated from the 161-187p move.

In fact, had I had the time and presence of mind, it would have been possible, using the horizontal S&Rs, to have worked out 161p as a likely low. Hindsight now of course.

Looking beyond the end of wave 3 at 298p, theory suggests a 38.2% retrace from 298p to form wave 4. That points to 256p which, again, is remarkably close to 260p which ought to become strong support once it's taken out. A 5th wave equal the the first would add a theoretical 69p to that figure which would give 329p and we have gap resistance at 337p.

IMHO that's a lot of coincidences - every theoretical wave target matches almost exactly a horizontal support or resistance - so whether a trader believes in EWT or not, they'd be the levels to trade anyway.

I've deliberately made this EWT discussion pertain to GKP as it's a GKP thread, but perhaps we could debate our undertsnading/interpretation of EWT in the Elliott Wave discussion section? I think we could both help each other and other readers too. I know we both agree on EWT's importance...

ATB

Remo

GKP seems to bring out the best in every board.
Maybe this share should have it's own forum, so that the bickering continues else where.

On a TA note, i found P&F charts worked the best with GKP last time. , Twas very clear when to buy and sell.

F4T,

I am amazed at your lack of understanding of the market: what moves the market and creates the trend is money, professional money, not the 'herd'. The herd are the majority of PI's and plenty of 'so-called' professionals, who buy at the top of the market and sell at the bottom. They pay lip-service to trading with the trend and then do the exact opposite.

Having known Remo for the last four years I can tell you he always preaches, to those who want to listen, to 'trade with the trend'. Few understand the concept of differing, and sometimes conflicting trends, in different time-frames and hence they find it difficult to determine when we are near tops and bottoms.

We don't make a habit of divulging trades on this board so how you can make suppositions as to my trading of GKP is beyond me. However, for your information I am prepared to say I am well in profit at the current SP. I should have sold out when the price passed 400 but, at that time, I was naive enough to listen to all the 'news' about TO's and new very little about TA and EWT. These days I would never get involved in this trade in the first instance.

I'm aware EWT is not for everyone and, in the interests of keeping this a harmonious site I intend to withdraw rather than to create confrontation. If anyone would like my opinion on a subject then just ask and I will proffer, otherwise I'll keep quiet. Big thanks to everyone, especially Remo, who has help me so much over the years.

No worries remo,

I am glad that you making profits regularly as I do. Most PI's don't BUT most II's and professinals houses do. that is where our opinions are skewed. you see everything form the point of the amateur PI's. I don't.

If you are making profits then you are trading with the market, i.e. in the same direction. That being so you are trading with the majority and thus following the crowd.

It you are losing money you are clearly trading against the market direction and thus are contrary to the majority and going against the crowd.

That is the market. I have neen here a long time and am stil here. You have to see the forest before picking your favourite tree.

diver993, no need for childish sarcasm mate. You make your money mostly from PI's and amateurs that lose it hand over fist. The market wouldn't move in your direction if most of the transactions were not following. It seems to me that you were trading with the PI crowd on GKP recently and not the smart money. Never mind, no one gets it right every time. That is the game.

I suggest you both think about this further and step back from being a PI and step back from the TA detail a little. It is not uncommon for PI's like yourselves to think that you are different because you make some money. You are probably just the best of the bunch but you will make nowhere near what the pro's do and it is them that mostly move the market, not the crowd that you are part of.


F4T.

remo wrote:

Sorry mate, got to disagree. 161.8 is the minimum extension for a wave 3 compared to wave 1. If it doesn't make at least this level it is not an impulse but an ABC. What you also have to remember is impulse moves can nest which can greatly increase their length. I can show you plenty of instances of wave 3 much longer than 161.8 of wave 1.

Food for thought eh!?? Oops! A slip of the tongue:)

Only losers follow the crowd.... unless, of course you follow them to do the exact opposite of what they do. It is the crowd, after all, that pay for our trades. Without the herd losing their money there would be nothing for the wise to pick up. Food for thought indeed! Go boil ya head man! Ya haven't a clue!

This is very Intriguing TA indeed.

What would those 261.8% and 423% levels be this time round Jackozy?

I am amazed by TA but still have much to learn.

Many thanks.

Sorry, I forgot to add...sometimes extended waves are so strong the they do have multiple extended subwaves and this can lead to them reaching the 261.8% or even the 423% levels (GKP did this latter in Autumn 2009) but this is really quite rare and requires some major fundamental change.

Diver, thanks for your reply. In response, I hope I can answer Bonobo's question purely from a theoretical standpoint ie if GKP follows EWT then the answer to Bonobo's question automatically emerges.

Most impulse waves have one extended subwave. This is most commonly the 3rd, sometimes the 5th and almost never the 1st. To that end we can denote the 1st subwave of an impulse to have unit length. In GKP's case (if we are assuming that it is in an impulse as opposed to a corrective wave), this 1st wave was from 161p to 187.7p. That's 26.7p obviously.

Let's also assume that the move up from 172p was/is the 3rd wave and that it's extended per the norm (after all, it did retrace almost exactly the "correct" amount of 61.8% for a wave 2). An extended wave is, in fact, normally 161.8% of the unit (1st) wave, not the 261.8% figure you've used according to EWT. I won't go into the maths here but that is definitely what EWT says about the theoretical length of an extended wave.

So, wave 3 ought to be 161.8% of 26.7p which is 43.2p. Add this to the assumed wave 2 low and we get 215.2p. This is uncannily close to the natural resistance at 217p which was a nice coincidence. In reality it's hit 220p and then dropped back to close below the 161.8% Fib.

Again, if we assume 220p to have been the real top of wave 3 then we'd expect a 38.2% retrace theoretically. This would take us to 220-(220-172)x0.382 which is 201.7p. That's the theoretical level for a wave 4 assuming that this series is impulsive. 203/4p is pretty close to this is it not?

Further, EWT suggests that if the 3rd wave is extended then the 5th is likely to be no more than equal to the 1st wave. Let's assume it's exactly equal at 26.7p. We add this to the theoretical wave 4 low of 201.7p and we get 228.4p for the wave 5 target. Remarkably close to the gap resistance at 230p, no?

So, I'd favour a drop back to that key area (in fact a backtest of the breakout from 204p would be sufficient for me) before rising to fill the gap. That would complete 5 waves up and the 1st wave up of a larger degree series.

And what do we expect after a 1st wave up? The theoretical norm would be a 61.8% retrace and guess where that would take it? You've guessed it...a backtest of the breakout from 187p.

Of course, it's very dangerous to assume that theory will play out and we should always trade what we see in front of us but it is quite uncanny how theory so often fits with natural supports and resistances. I didn't call 161p as the low but I did state it as an important support level. Despite what some may say, theoretically until there's a retrace which stays above 200p followed by a new high above 220p there's still a possibility that this whole sequence from 161p is corrective rather than impulsive.

I will not be assuming that the theory above will play out. I will bear it in mind but you never know. Here are some of the Fib sequences I've discussed on a chart. They're colour coded so you know which Fib lines belong to which sequences:



dl.dropbox.com/u/20815047/GKPdaily12_01_13.gif