GKP

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: hi food4thought
Thanks for your concern
but ive been beating the markets for a very long time now and you just have to look at my recommendation .I trade every thing out there so to do that its very difficult. Just go through all my post and see how many tips ive given.(Just look at my recent blog on trades update) You also need to bear in mind i have a system and i take profits pretty quickly.
this subject is arguable so lets just agree to disagree.
thanks mate

Food4Thought wrote: Remo,

it seems we have different definitions of the word crowd. My definition is the majority and it is the majority of transactions that move the market. I am not sure what your definition is. Perhaps you mean the majority of amateur PI's that post on public internet forums.

If that is the case then I agree.

If not, then be careful in thinking that you can beat the market mate. Contrarians never win in the long term, that is a fact.

I am going to leave it there.

F4T

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